The Profound Influence of Social Determinants of Health on Health Equity: An In-Depth Analysis

Abstract

Social determinants of health (SDOH) represent the intricate tapestry of non-medical factors that profoundly shape an individual’s health trajectory and population-level health outcomes. These encompass a broad spectrum of conditions, including economic stability, access to quality education, the nature of social and community contexts, the accessibility and quality of healthcare, and the characteristics of the built environment. Far from being auxiliary influences, SDOH are foundational drivers of health disparities, often exerting a more significant and pervasive impact on health than biological or genetic predispositions, or even healthcare access in isolation. This comprehensive report delves into the multifaceted dimensions of SDOH, meticulously examining their causal pathways to health inequities. It explores advanced methodologies for integrating SDOH data into electronic health records (EHRs) and clinical practice to foster holistic patient care. Furthermore, it scrutinizes a range of evidence-based policy interventions spanning multiple sectors, designed to address these fundamental societal drivers and advance the imperative of health equity.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

1. Introduction: Reconceptualizing Health Beyond the Clinic

Health disparities, understood as systematic, avoidable, and unjust differences in health outcomes that are closely linked with social, economic, and environmental disadvantages, represent a critical challenge to public health globally [WHO, 2025]. Traditionally, health has often been narrowly conceptualized within a biomedical framework, focusing predominantly on disease pathology, individual lifestyle choices, and the provision of clinical care. However, a robust and growing body of evidence unequivocally demonstrates that a person’s health is overwhelmingly shaped by the conditions in which they are born, grow, live, work, and age. These conditions are collectively known as the social determinants of health (SDOH) [CDC, n.d.].

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines SDOH as ‘the non-medical factors that influence health outcomes’ [WHO, 2025]. These overarching forces include economic stability, educational attainment, the quality of social and community contexts, the availability and quality of healthcare, and the characteristics of the neighborhood and built environment. It is now widely acknowledged that these factors often underlie observed health disparities and can play a more significant role in determining health outcomes and life expectancy than individual genetic makeup or access to medical services alone [Marmot, 2015]. Indeed, estimates suggest that medical care accounts for only 10-20% of health outcomes, with the remaining 80-90% attributable to SDOH [Hood et al., 2016].

The recognition of SDOH marks a pivotal shift in public health and healthcare discourse, moving towards a holistic, population-level perspective that emphasizes the upstream drivers of health and disease. This paradigm acknowledges that achieving genuine health equity – where everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be as healthy as possible – necessitates addressing the root causes of health inequities embedded within societal structures and policies [Braveman & Gottlieb, 2014]. This report aims to provide an in-depth exploration of SDOH, detailing their constituent elements, elucidating their profound impact on health disparities, discussing contemporary approaches to integrate them into clinical practice, and analyzing the spectrum of policy interventions required to foster a healthier, more equitable society.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

2. A Comprehensive Understanding of Social Determinants of Health: Frameworks and Categories

Social determinants of health encompass a vast and interconnected array of factors, extending far beyond individual behaviors to influence health outcomes at the population level. While various frameworks exist, the WHO’s conceptual framework and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Healthy People 2030 framework provide comprehensive categorizations. The latter identifies five key domains, which serve as a robust foundation for detailed analysis:

2.1. Economic Stability

Economic stability is perhaps one of the most fundamental SDOH, serving as a gateway to other health-promoting resources. It refers to an individual’s financial resources and their capacity to meet basic needs and aspirations. Lack of economic stability creates pervasive stress, limits choices, and exposes individuals to greater health risks [Cutler et al., 2014]. Key components include:

• Employment and Income: Stable, well-paying employment provides income for housing, food, healthcare, and transportation. Unemployment, underemployment, or precarious work often lead to financial strain, stress, and reduced access to health-promoting resources. Low wages may necessitate working multiple jobs, leading to chronic fatigue, limited time for exercise or healthy food preparation, and delayed healthcare seeking [Braveman et al., 2010]. Income inequality within societies is also strongly linked to poorer population health outcomes [Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009].
• Poverty: Individuals and families living below the poverty line face severe constraints on their ability to afford nutritious food, safe housing, adequate clothing, and essential healthcare. Chronic poverty is associated with heightened exposure to environmental hazards, increased psychological stress, and higher rates of chronic diseases, infant mortality, and lower life expectancy [Singh & Siahpush, 2006].
• Food Security: Defined as having consistent access to enough food for an active, healthy life, food security is directly tied to economic stability. Food insecurity is a pervasive issue, leading to malnutrition, obesity (due to reliance on cheaper, calorie-dense but nutrient-poor foods), and chronic health conditions like diabetes and heart disease [Gundersen & Ziliak, 2015].
• Housing Security: Stable, safe, and affordable housing is crucial for health. Housing insecurity, including homelessness, eviction, or residing in substandard housing, correlates with increased exposure to violence, infectious diseases, chronic conditions, and mental health disorders. Housing costs often consume a disproportionate share of income, forcing trade-offs with other necessities like food and healthcare [Pollack et al., 2010].
• Medical Debt: High healthcare costs can lead to significant medical debt, even for insured individuals, forcing difficult financial decisions that further compromise economic stability and overall health. This cycle can deter individuals from seeking necessary medical care due to financial anxieties [Himmelstein et al., 2009].

2.2. Education Access and Quality

Education is a powerful determinant of health, influencing health literacy, employment opportunities, income levels, and overall life choices. Higher levels of education are consistently associated with better health outcomes and longer life expectancies [Mirowsky & Ross, 2003]. This relationship is multifaceted:

• Early Childhood Education and Development: Access to high-quality early learning environments profoundly impacts cognitive and socio-emotional development, laying the groundwork for future academic and professional success. Disparities in early childhood education can entrench health inequities across the lifespan [Heckman, 2006].
• High School Graduation and Higher Education: Educational attainment directly correlates with job prospects and earning potential. Individuals with higher levels of education are more likely to secure stable, higher-paying jobs with better benefits, which in turn provides greater economic stability and access to health-promoting resources. They are also more likely to be health literate, understand health information, engage in preventative behaviors, and navigate the healthcare system effectively [Cutler & Lleras-Muney, 2006].
• Health Literacy: Education significantly influences an individual’s capacity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services needed to make appropriate health decisions. Low health literacy is associated with poorer health outcomes, less preventative care, and higher rates of hospitalization [Paasche-Orlow & Wolf, 2007].
• School Environment: The quality of the school environment, including safety, resources, and social support, impacts students’ physical and mental health. Exposure to violence, bullying, or inadequate facilities can have lasting negative health consequences [Brooks-Gunn et al., 2013].

2.3. Social and Community Context

The social and community context encompasses the intricate web of relationships, cultural norms, and civic structures that influence an individual’s health and well-being. These factors shape opportunities for social support, personal safety, and community engagement [Kawachi & Berkman, 2003]. Key elements include:

• Social Cohesion and Support Systems: Strong social networks, community trust, and a sense of belonging are protective factors against mental illness, chronic stress, and isolation. Conversely, social isolation and lack of support can exacerbate health problems [Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010].
• Community Engagement and Civic Participation: Active involvement in community life, including volunteering or participation in local governance, fosters collective efficacy and strengthens community resources, which can indirectly improve health outcomes by advocating for better local services and environments.
• Discrimination and Racism: Experiences of discrimination, whether based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or other characteristics, are powerful determinants of health. Systemic racism, in particular, leads to chronic stress, unequal access to resources, and adverse health outcomes across generations [Jones, 2000]. It shapes policies and practices that perpetuate inequities in housing, education, employment, and justice. Studies consistently show that racial discrimination is associated with higher rates of hypertension, chronic disease, and poor mental health [Williams & Mohammed, 2013].
• Community Safety and Violence: Living in areas with high rates of crime and violence creates pervasive stress, limits outdoor activity, and impacts mental health. Exposure to violence, especially in childhood, can have long-lasting physiological and psychological consequences [Anda et al., 2006].
• Incarceration and Justice System Involvement: Involvement with the justice system, particularly for individuals from marginalized communities, is a significant SDOH. It disrupts social networks, limits employment opportunities, and contributes to poor physical and mental health outcomes for individuals and their families [Freudenberg, 2012].

2.4. Healthcare Access and Quality

While medical care accounts for a smaller proportion of overall health outcomes compared to other SDOH, access to timely, affordable, and high-quality healthcare remains vital for preventing disease, managing chronic conditions, and promoting well-being. Barriers to healthcare access exacerbate existing health disparities [IOM, 2001]. Critical aspects include:

• Health Insurance Coverage: Lack of health insurance is a major barrier to care, often leading to delayed diagnoses, poorer management of chronic conditions, and greater financial burden from medical expenses. Even with insurance, high deductibles or co-pays can deter individuals from seeking necessary care.
• Availability of Healthcare Services: Geographical barriers (e.g., rural areas with few providers), lack of transportation, or a shortage of specialists can limit access to essential medical services. This includes primary care, mental health services, dental care, and specialized treatment [Rosenthal, 2017].
• Linguistic and Cultural Competence: Effective communication between patients and providers is paramount. Lack of culturally and linguistically appropriate care can lead to misunderstandings, mistrust, and poorer health outcomes for diverse populations [Betancourt et al., 2005].
• Quality of Care: Even when accessible, the quality of care can vary significantly. Factors such as provider bias, insufficient time with patients, or lack of coordination across care settings can diminish the effectiveness of healthcare interventions.
• Access to Preventative and Rehabilitative Services: Preventative screenings, vaccinations, chronic disease management programs, and rehabilitation services are crucial for maintaining health and function. Inequitable access to these services widens health gaps.

2.5. Neighborhood and Built Environment

The physical environment where people live, work, and recreate profoundly influences their health. This includes both natural and human-made elements that shape daily life and access to resources [Jackson, 2003]. Key dimensions include:

• Housing and Utilities: Quality of housing, including exposure to lead paint, mold, pests, or inadequate heating/cooling, directly impacts respiratory health, childhood development, and overall well-being. Overcrowding, lack of essential utilities, or exposure to hazardous waste sites are also significant risks [Krieger & Higgins, 2002].
• Transportation: Access to reliable, affordable, and safe transportation (public transit, walkable/bikeable infrastructure) is essential for accessing employment, education, healthcare, and healthy food. Lack of transportation can lead to social isolation and limit access to vital services.
• Food Environment (Food Deserts/Swamps): Access to affordable, healthy food options (fresh produce, lean proteins) is critical. ‘Food deserts’ are areas with limited access to healthy food, often replaced by ‘food swamps’ replete with fast food and convenience stores. This environment contributes to poor diet quality, obesity, and related chronic diseases [Walker et al., 2010].
• Environmental Quality: Exposure to pollutants (air, water, soil), industrial toxins, noise pollution, and lack of green spaces (parks, trees) significantly impacts health. Low-income communities and communities of color are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards [Pastor et al., 2006].
• Green Spaces and Recreational Facilities: Access to parks, recreational facilities, and safe outdoor spaces promotes physical activity, reduces stress, and enhances mental well-being. Disparities in access to these amenities contribute to inactivity and related health issues.
• Safety of Public Spaces: The perceived and actual safety of public spaces, including streets, parks, and schools, influences physical activity levels, social interaction, and mental health. High crime rates deter outdoor activities and foster chronic stress.

2.6. Interconnectedness and Causal Pathways

It is imperative to recognize that these SDOH categories are not isolated but are deeply interconnected, forming complex causal pathways to health outcomes. For instance, limited access to quality education (Education) can lead to fewer employment opportunities and lower income (Economic Stability), which in turn restricts access to healthy food and safe housing (Neighborhood and Built Environment), and may also reduce access to health insurance (Healthcare Access), ultimately contributing to higher rates of chronic disease and shorter life expectancies [Link & Phelan, 1995]. This interconnectedness necessitates comprehensive, multi-sectoral approaches to effectively address health inequities.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

3. The Profound Impact of Social Determinants of Health on Health Disparities

Social determinants of health are not merely correlated with health disparities; they are their fundamental drivers, explaining why certain population groups experience systematically worse health outcomes than others. The impact of SDOH is observed across virtually all health indicators, from infant mortality and chronic disease prevalence to mental health and life expectancy [Marmot, 2015].

3.1. Racial and Ethnic Disparities

While race itself is a social construct rather than a biological one, racism and its systemic manifestations are powerful SDOH. Systemic racism has historically and continues to shape the distribution of resources and opportunities, leading to stark health disparities. For example, policies such as redlining historically segregated communities, denying Black Americans access to homeownership, quality education, and employment opportunities. The legacy of these policies continues to impact wealth accumulation, neighborhood quality, and exposure to environmental toxins [Rothstein, 2017].

• Cardiovascular Disease: Black adults in the U.S. have higher rates of hypertension, heart disease, and stroke, often attributed to chronic stress from racism, limited access to healthy foods, and inadequate healthcare within historically marginalized neighborhoods [Williams & Wyatt, 2015].
• Maternal and Infant Mortality: Black women experience significantly higher rates of maternal mortality compared to White women, regardless of socioeconomic status or education. This disparity is often linked to systemic bias in healthcare, chronic stress from racism, and underlying SDOH [Creanga et al., 2014]. Infant mortality rates are also higher in these communities, influenced by factors like poverty, inadequate prenatal care access, and environmental exposures.
• Diabetes: Hispanic/Latino and Native American populations often experience higher prevalence and worse outcomes for Type 2 diabetes, linked to food insecurity, cultural dietary patterns in a Westernized environment, and limited access to culturally competent healthcare providers [CDC, 2020].

3.2. Socioeconomic Status (SES) and Health Disparities

Socioeconomic status (measured by income, education, and occupation) is one of the most consistent predictors of health outcomes. The ‘social gradient in health’ describes the phenomenon where health outcomes systematically improve with increasing SES [Marmot, 2010].

• Life Expectancy: Individuals in the lowest income quintile often experience significantly shorter life expectancies and more years lived with disability compared to those in the highest income quintile [Chetty et al., 2016]. For instance, a 2016 study found a difference of 10-15 years in life expectancy between the richest and poorest Americans.
• Chronic Diseases: Lower SES is strongly associated with higher rates of chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This is due to a confluence of factors including poorer nutrition, higher stress levels, occupational hazards, reduced access to preventative care, and less adherence to treatment regimens due to financial constraints or lack of health literacy [Adler & Rehkopf, 2008].
• Mental Health: Poverty and economic insecurity are significant risk factors for mental health conditions, including depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders. Chronic financial strain and the stressors associated with living in disadvantaged neighborhoods contribute to a higher burden of mental illness [McLaughlin et al., 2011].
• Child Health and Development: Children growing up in poverty are more likely to experience developmental delays, asthma, lead poisoning, and academic difficulties, which can have lifelong health consequences. They often have less access to nutritious food, safe play spaces, and stimulating learning environments [Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997].

3.3. Geographic and Rural-Urban Disparities

Place of residence significantly impacts health, often reflecting underlying disparities in SDOH. Rural areas, for example, frequently face unique challenges:

• Access to Healthcare: Rural communities often have fewer healthcare providers, particularly specialists, and limited access to hospitals or emergency services, leading to delays in care and worse outcomes for acute and chronic conditions [Ricketts, 2000].
• Transportation Barriers: Long distances to services and limited public transportation options create significant barriers for rural residents in accessing healthcare, healthy food, and employment.
• Broadband Access: Lack of reliable internet access in many rural areas can hinder access to telehealth services, online educational resources, and employment opportunities, further exacerbating health inequities.
• Environmental Hazards: Some rural areas may be disproportionately affected by environmental hazards related to agriculture, mining, or industrial pollution, impacting respiratory health and contributing to chronic diseases.

3.4. Disability Disparities

Individuals with disabilities often face compounded disadvantages across multiple SDOH categories. As highlighted by the Collaborative on Health Reform and Independent Living (CHRILL), people with disabilities frequently experience [chril.org, n.d.]:

• Economic Instability: Higher rates of unemployment, underemployment, and poverty due to discrimination, lack of accessible workplaces, and lower wages. This impacts their ability to afford housing, food, and essential services.
• Limited Access to Quality Education: Persistent barriers in educational settings, including inaccessible facilities, inadequate accommodations, and discriminatory attitudes, can limit educational attainment.
• Social Isolation: Stigma, physical barriers, and lack of inclusive community programs can lead to social isolation and reduced community engagement.
• Healthcare Access Barriers: Physical inaccessibility of clinics, lack of accessible medical equipment, communication barriers, and provider unfamiliarity with disability-specific health needs can severely limit quality healthcare access [Krahn et al., 2016].
• Built Environment Challenges: Inaccessible housing, transportation, and public spaces create significant daily challenges, limiting participation in society and access to health-promoting resources.

These examples underscore that SDOH do not act in isolation but interact in complex ways, creating cumulative disadvantages for marginalized populations. Addressing health disparities therefore requires a systemic approach that targets these underlying social and economic factors.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

4. Integrating Social Determinants of Health into Healthcare Systems: From Screening to Systemic Change

Incorporating SDOH data and interventions into healthcare systems is crucial for moving beyond a purely reactive, disease-focused model to one that is proactive, holistic, and prevention-oriented. This integration aims to provide comprehensive patient care by understanding the broader context of a patient’s life and connecting them to necessary resources [Gottlieb et al., 2017].

4.1. Screening and Assessment for SDOH

The initial step in integrating SDOH into clinical practice is systematic screening. Various tools and methods have been developed to identify patients’ social needs:

• Standardized Screening Tools: Organizations like the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) recommend screening for a core set of SDOH domains. Tools like PRAPARE (Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients’ Assets, Risks, and Experiences) screen for issues such as housing, food, transportation, utilities, safety, and financial strain [NCQA, 2017].
• Patient-Centered Approaches: Screening should be conducted in a sensitive, non-judgmental manner, ideally integrated into routine workflows. This might involve patient self-report questionnaires, brief verbal screenings by clinical staff, or more in-depth assessments by social workers or community health workers.
• Challenges in Screening: Despite the benefits, challenges persist. These include clinic workflow disruptions, staff training needs, patient discomfort with disclosing sensitive information, concerns about ‘opening a Pandora’s Box’ of needs without adequate resources, and a lack of standardized data collection methods and coding [Singal et al., 2019].

4.2. Data Integration in Electronic Health Records (EHRs)

Capturing SDOH data in EHRs is essential for enhancing patient care, facilitating population health management, and informing research. The goal is to move beyond disparate data points to an integrated, actionable system [Cantor & Thorpe, 2018].

• Standardized Coding: The adoption of standardized codes, such as the Z codes in ICD-10-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification) for ‘Factors Influencing Health Status and Contact with Health Services,’ allows for systematic documentation of social risks (e.g., ‘Z59.0 – Homelessness,’ ‘Z59.4 – Lack of adequate food’). These codes enable aggregation of data for population health analysis and risk stratification [CMS, 2019].
• Interoperability and Data Sharing: A significant challenge is ensuring interoperability between EHR systems and with community-based organizations (CBOs) that provide social services. Secure and ethical data sharing protocols are critical for creating a comprehensive patient profile and facilitating effective referrals [Fraze et al., 2019].
• Benefits: Integrating SDOH data into EHRs allows providers to gain a holistic understanding of patient needs, inform personalized care plans, identify at-risk populations for targeted interventions, and conduct research on the effectiveness of SDOH interventions. This data can also be used for quality reporting and value-based care models.
• Current State and Future Directions: While integration is still evolving, many healthcare organizations are piloting programs. Future directions involve leveraging artificial intelligence and machine learning to analyze SDOH data for predictive analytics, identifying patients most likely to benefit from specific social interventions, and personalizing outreach efforts [Chen et al., 2020].

4.3. Clinical Interventions and Linkages to Community Resources

Identifying social needs is only the first step; the critical component is acting on that information through targeted interventions and strong linkages to community resources.

• Referral Systems: Developing robust referral pathways to community-based organizations (CBOs) is paramount. This can involve ‘closed-loop’ referral systems where healthcare providers can track whether patients successfully connected with referred services (e.g., food banks, housing assistance programs, legal aid clinics, transportation services) [Bailey et al., 2020].
• Community Health Workers (CHWs) and Patient Navigators: CHWs and patient navigators play a vital role in connecting patients to resources, overcoming logistical barriers, and building trust. They often share lived experiences with the communities they serve, providing culturally sensitive support and advocacy [CDC, n.d.]. Their effectiveness in improving health outcomes by addressing SDOH is increasingly recognized [Kangovi et al., 2018].
• On-site Social Services: Some healthcare systems are integrating social workers, legal aid services, or food pantries directly into their clinics or hospitals, providing immediate access to critical support.
• Place-Based Interventions and Anchor Institutions: Healthcare systems are increasingly recognizing their role as ‘anchor institutions’ within their communities, investing in local housing, employment, and economic development initiatives to address SDOH upstream [Taylor et al., 2018].
• Value-Based Care Models: The shift from fee-for-service to value-based care models incentivizes healthcare organizations to address SDOH, as these factors directly impact health outcomes and, consequently, reimbursement. Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and managed care plans are exploring ways to financially support social interventions [Health Affairs, 2019].

4.4. Measuring Effectiveness and Building the Evidence Base

A critical challenge in integrating SDOH is the limited evidence on the effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) of specific interventions. While conceptually sound, rigorous evaluation is needed [Health Affairs, 2017].

• Research and Evaluation: Robust research methodologies are required to assess which SDOH interventions are most effective for different populations and conditions. This includes randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and implementation science approaches.
• Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Demonstrating the cost-effectiveness of SDOH interventions (e.g., showing that investing in housing assistance reduces emergency room visits and hospitalizations) is crucial for securing sustainable funding and buy-in from payers and policymakers [Pollack et al., 2018].
• Standardized Outcome Measures: Developing and validating standardized measures for SDOH outcomes (e.g., reduction in food insecurity, improvement in housing stability) will facilitate comparisons across studies and build a stronger evidence base.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

5. Policy Interventions Addressing Social Determinants of Health: A Multi-Sectoral Imperative

Addressing SDOH effectively requires a departure from siloed approaches, necessitating comprehensive, multi-sectoral policy interventions that target the underlying social, economic, and environmental factors influencing health. Healthcare systems alone cannot resolve the deep-seated issues that shape health inequities; broader societal and governmental action is essential [WHO, 2025]. The ‘Health in All Policies’ (HiAP) approach is a key strategy, advocating for health considerations to be integrated into policymaking across all government sectors [Kickbusch & Gleicher, 2012].

5.1. Economic Stability Policies

Policies aimed at improving economic stability directly mitigate many health risks:

• Living Wage and Minimum Wage Laws: Implementing and enforcing living wage policies ensures that full-time workers earn enough to meet basic needs, reducing poverty and its associated health burdens [Allegretto et al., 2011].
• Earned Income Tax Credits (EITC) and Child Tax Credits: These programs provide financial support to low-income working families, improving family economic well-being and child health outcomes [Hoynes et al., 2016].
• Affordable Housing Programs: Investments in subsidized housing (e.g., Section 8 vouchers, low-income housing tax credits) and rent control policies can reduce housing insecurity, prevent homelessness, and free up resources for other health-promoting needs [Belsky et al., 2007].
• Unemployment Benefits and Job Training Programs: Robust unemployment insurance provides a safety net during job loss, while job training and placement services can improve long-term employment prospects and economic mobility.
• Food Assistance Programs: Strengthening and expanding programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) ensures access to nutritious food for vulnerable populations, combating food insecurity and improving dietary quality [Currie, 2009].

5.2. Education Policies

Investing in education across the lifespan is a powerful, long-term strategy for improving health equity:

• Early Childhood Education Investment: Universal or highly subsidized pre-kindergarten programs and high-quality childcare can close achievement gaps early, leading to better academic outcomes, higher earning potential, and improved health in adulthood [Heckman, 2006].
• Equitable School Funding: Policies that ensure equitable funding for schools in low-income neighborhoods can improve educational resources, reduce class sizes, and attract qualified teachers, thereby enhancing educational quality and opportunities for all students [Baker et al., 2016].
• Wraparound Services in Schools: Implementing school-based health centers, nutrition programs, and social-emotional learning initiatives addresses non-academic barriers to learning and supports students’ holistic well-being.
• Affordable Higher Education and Vocational Training: Policies that make college and vocational training more affordable and accessible can increase educational attainment, leading to better jobs and improved health literacy.

5.3. Social and Community Context Policies

Policies that foster inclusive, safe, and supportive communities are critical for population health:

• Anti-Discrimination Laws and Enforcement: Robust legal protections against discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, and other characteristics are essential for promoting equity in employment, housing, and access to services [Jones, 2000].
• Community Policing and Violence Prevention Programs: Strategies that build trust between law enforcement and communities, invest in violence interruption programs, and provide mental health support can enhance community safety and reduce trauma [Cook & Ludwig, 2004].
• Investments in Community Infrastructure: Funding for community centers, libraries, parks, and youth programs can strengthen social cohesion, provide safe spaces, and offer opportunities for engagement and learning.
• Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice Reform: Policies aimed at reducing mass incarceration, addressing systemic biases in the justice system, and supporting successful reentry for formerly incarcerated individuals can mitigate profound negative health impacts on individuals, families, and communities [Pettit & Western, 2004].

5.4. Healthcare Access and Quality Policies

While SDOH extend beyond healthcare, policies ensuring equitable access to quality care are still vital:

• Universal Health Coverage: Policies that aim for universal health coverage, such as single-payer systems or robust public health insurance expansions (e.g., Medicaid expansion), significantly reduce financial barriers to care and improve health outcomes for vulnerable populations [Sommers et al., 2014].
• Telehealth Expansion and Reimbursement: Policies supporting telehealth services can improve access to care for individuals in rural areas or those with transportation barriers, particularly for mental health and chronic disease management.
• Support for Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs): Increased funding and support for FQHCs, which provide comprehensive primary care regardless of ability to pay, are crucial for serving underserved communities and integrating social services.
• Workforce Diversity and Cultural Competence Training: Policies promoting diversity within the healthcare workforce and mandating cultural competence training for providers can improve the quality and appropriateness of care for diverse populations.
• Integration of Behavioral Health: Policies that facilitate the integration of mental health and substance use services into primary care settings improve access and reduce stigma, addressing a critical component of overall health.

5.5. Neighborhood and Built Environment Policies

Policies shaping the physical environment have a profound and direct impact on health:

• Zoning Laws and Urban Planning: Smart urban planning that promotes mixed-use developments, walkable neighborhoods, public transportation, and green spaces can encourage physical activity, reduce pollution exposure, and foster social interaction [Frumkin et 2004].
• Environmental Regulations and Enforcement: Strong regulations on air and water quality, hazardous waste disposal, and lead abatement programs protect communities from harmful environmental exposures, particularly in historically marginalized areas [Gee & Payne-Sturges, 2004].
• Healthy Food Policies: Policies that incentivize healthy food retailers in food deserts, support farmers’ markets, regulate marketing of unhealthy foods to children, and encourage healthy school meals can improve dietary quality across populations [Mozaffarian et al., 2011].
• Active Transportation Infrastructure: Investments in sidewalks, bike lanes, and safe pedestrian crossings promote physical activity and offer sustainable transportation options.
• Public Housing Revitalization: Policies that rehabilitate and improve the safety and quality of public housing can address critical housing-related health issues for low-income residents.

5.6. Cross-Sectoral Collaboration and Governance

Effective SDOH policy requires unprecedented levels of cross-sectoral collaboration. The ‘Health in All Policies’ (HiAP) framework provides a structured approach for integrating health considerations into decision-making across diverse sectors, including housing, transportation, education, and economic development. This approach recognizes that health is not solely the responsibility of the health sector but is co-produced by multiple government agencies, non-profits, community organizations, and the private sector [WHO, 2013]. Coordinated governance, shared metrics, and pooled funding mechanisms are essential for successful implementation.

5.7. Challenges in Policy Implementation

Despite the clear need, implementing effective SDOH policies faces several challenges:

• Political Will and Funding: Securing sustained political commitment and adequate funding for upstream, long-term interventions can be difficult amidst competing priorities and short-term electoral cycles.
• Interagency Coordination: siloed government structures and differing mandates can hinder the necessary collaboration across sectors.
• Measurement and Evaluation: Demonstrating the impact of complex, multi-sectoral interventions requires sophisticated evaluation methods and long-term data collection, which can be resource-intensive.
• Equity and Inclusivity: Ensuring that policies are designed and implemented with an equity lens, genuinely engaging affected communities, and addressing the root causes of systemic disadvantage is critical to avoid perpetuating existing inequities.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

6. Ethical Considerations in Addressing Social Determinants of Health

As healthcare systems and policymakers increasingly engage with SDOH, several ethical considerations come to the forefront. Navigating these complexities is essential to ensure that efforts to improve health equity are just, respectful, and effective.

6.1. Data Privacy and Security

Collecting sensitive personal information about a patient’s social needs (e.g., housing status, income, experiences of discrimination) raises significant privacy concerns. Healthcare organizations must ensure robust data security protocols and clear policies on how this information is stored, accessed, and shared [Wolf & Paasche-Orlow, 2019]. Patients must be informed about the purpose of data collection, how their data will be used, and their rights to consent or refuse to share information. Anonymization and aggregation of data are critical for population health research to protect individual identities.

6.2. Avoiding Stigmatization and Victim-Blaming

Screening for SDOH must be conducted in a sensitive and non-judgmental manner to avoid stigmatizing individuals who face social disadvantages. The language used in clinical settings and policy documents should emphasize systemic factors rather than framing social needs as individual failings. Healthcare providers and staff require training to approach these conversations with empathy and respect, ensuring that patients feel supported rather than blamed for their circumstances [Phelan et al., 2010]. The goal is to address the root causes of vulnerability, not to label individuals as ‘at risk’ in ways that perpetuate stereotypes.

6.3. Ensuring Culturally Appropriate and Patient-Centered Interventions

Interventions designed to address SDOH must be culturally sensitive, linguistically appropriate, and tailored to the specific needs and preferences of diverse patient populations. A ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach is unlikely to be effective and could even be counterproductive. Engaging community members and organizations in the design and implementation of interventions is crucial to ensure relevance and acceptability. Shared decision-making processes empower patients to identify their priorities and preferred solutions for addressing social needs [Beach et al., 2006].

6.4. Equity in Access to SDOH Interventions

As healthcare systems develop programs and referral networks to address SDOH, it is critical to ensure that these interventions themselves are equitably accessible. There is a risk that resource-intensive interventions might disproportionately benefit those who are already more connected or navigate systems more easily, inadvertently widening rather than narrowing disparities. Deliberate strategies are needed to reach the most marginalized and vulnerable populations, including those who are difficult to engage in traditional healthcare settings.

6.5. Scope of Responsibility and Professional Boundaries

Healthcare professionals are trained in clinical medicine, and addressing complex social needs can extend beyond their traditional scope of practice and expertise. There is an ethical imperative to recognize the limits of medical intervention and to establish clear referral pathways to social services professionals. Training healthcare staff on SDOH should focus on identification, empathetic communication, and effective referral, rather than expecting them to become social workers. Furthermore, defining the institutional responsibility of healthcare organizations for addressing SDOH beyond the individual patient is an ongoing ethical discussion, particularly concerning community investments and advocacy for systemic change [Gottlieb & Hessler, 2019].

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

7. Future Directions in Addressing Social Determinants of Health

The field of social determinants of health is dynamic, with ongoing innovations and evolving strategies to tackle health inequities. Future directions promise to refine our understanding, enhance intervention effectiveness, and accelerate progress towards health equity.

7.1. Leveraging Data Science and Artificial Intelligence

Advanced analytics, big data, and artificial intelligence (AI) hold immense potential for identifying SDOH risks and tailoring interventions. Machine learning algorithms can analyze vast datasets from EHRs, social services, and publicly available information (e.g., census data, environmental reports) to identify individuals and populations at highest risk for SDOH-related health problems. This can enable more precise targeting of interventions, optimize resource allocation, and predict the impact of various social factors on health outcomes. However, ethical considerations regarding algorithmic bias, data privacy, and accountability must be carefully addressed [Goldstein et al., 2020].

7.2. Strengthening Upstream and Preventative Approaches

There is a growing recognition of the need to shift focus from ‘downstream’ interventions (addressing existing social needs) to more ‘upstream’ and preventative strategies that tackle the fundamental causes of poor SDOH. This includes advocating for universal policies like affordable housing, living wages, and universal early childhood education, which benefit entire populations and prevent social needs from arising in the first place. Future efforts will emphasize policy-level advocacy and systemic change as primary intervention strategies [Magnusson et al., 2019].

7.3. Community-Based Participatory Research and Co-Creation

Future efforts will increasingly prioritize community-based participatory research (CBPR) and co-creation models, where affected communities are actively involved in identifying their needs, designing interventions, and evaluating their effectiveness. This approach ensures that interventions are culturally relevant, acceptable, and sustainable, building community capacity and fostering empowerment. Moving beyond tokenistic engagement to genuine partnerships will be crucial for achieving equitable outcomes [Wallerstein & Duran, 2010].

7.4. Integrated Financing and Payment Models

The current fragmented financing of health and social services presents a significant barrier to addressing SDOH comprehensively. Future directions will explore innovative integrated financing and payment models that blend healthcare and social service funding. This could involve value-based payment models that incentivize health outcomes rather than services, or ‘blended’ funding streams that allow for flexible spending across medical and social needs. Such models could facilitate greater collaboration between healthcare providers and social service organizations [Taylor et al., 2018].

7.5. Global Health Equity and Climate Change

On a global scale, future discussions of SDOH must increasingly integrate the impacts of climate change. Climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, exacerbating existing SDOH through extreme weather events, displacement, food and water insecurity, and the spread of infectious diseases. Addressing climate change is, therefore, a critical SDOH intervention for global health equity [Watts et al., 2018].

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

8. Conclusion

Social determinants of health are not merely peripheral influences but are foundational to shaping health outcomes and perpetuating health disparities across populations. This report has underscored the profound impact of economic instability, educational inequities, adverse social and community contexts, barriers to quality healthcare, and detrimental built environments on individual and population health. The intricate and interconnected nature of these determinants necessitates a paradigm shift in how health is understood, managed, and improved.

Integrating SDOH data into healthcare systems through systematic screening and robust EHR integration holds immense promise for providing more holistic, patient-centered care and enabling targeted interventions. However, the true transformation towards health equity hinges on comprehensive, multi-sectoral policy interventions that address the upstream causes of these determinants. From investing in early childhood education and promoting economic stability through living wage policies, to creating safe and healthy built environments and dismantling systemic discrimination, a concerted effort across government, healthcare, community organizations, and the private sector is essential.

Ethical considerations, including data privacy, avoiding stigmatization, and ensuring culturally appropriate interventions, must guide all efforts to address SDOH. As we look to the future, leveraging advancements in data science, strengthening preventative approaches, fostering authentic community partnerships, and developing integrated financing models will be crucial. Ultimately, by recognizing and proactively addressing social determinants of health, societies can move beyond merely treating illness to truly fostering well-being, reducing health inequities, and building a healthier, more just world for all.

Many thanks to our sponsor Esdebe who helped us prepare this research report.

References

• Adler, N. E., & Rehkopf, D. H. (2008). ‘Poverty and Child Health: Recent Evidence and Research Directions’. The Future of Children, 18(2), 7-26.
• Allegretto, S. A., Jacobs, K., & Gordon, L. (2011). ‘Fast-Food Poverty Wages: How Living Wage Campaigns and the Affordable Care Act Would Benefit Workers and the Public’. University of California, Berkeley, Institute for Research on Labor and Employment.
• Anda, R. F., Felitti, V. J., Bremner, J. D., Walker, J. D., Whitfield, C., Perry, B. D., … & Giles, W. H. (2006). ‘The enduring effects of abuse and neglect in childhood’. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(22), 166-173.
• Bailey, S. C., Brega, A. G., Crittenden, K. S., Devellis, R. M., & Schillinger, D. (2020). ‘Health literacy and SDOH: Bridging the gap’. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35(Suppl 2), S476-S477.
• Baker, B. D., Sciarra, D. G., & Farrie, D. (2016). ‘Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card’. Education Law Center.
• Beach, M. C., Rosner, G., & Cooper, L. A. (2006). ‘With whom can I talk about my health? The role of physician gender and race’. Journal of the National Medical Association, 98(10), 1693.
• Belsky, E. S., Drew, J., & McCue, D. (2007). ‘The Affordable Housing Crisis: Challenges and Solutions’. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University.
• Betancourt, J. R., Green, A. R., & Carrillo, J. E. (2005). ‘Cultural competence and health care disparities: key perspectives and trends’. Health Affairs, 24(2), 499-505.
• Braveman, P., Cubbin, C., Egerter, S., Marks, B., & Chavez, G. (2010). ‘Socioeconomic status in health research: recent trends and ethical considerations’. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1186(1), 123-132.
• Braveman, P., & Gottlieb, L. (2014). ‘The social determinants of health: it’s time to consider the causes of the causes’. Public Health Reports, 129(Suppl 2), 19-31.
• Brooks-Gunn, J., & Duncan, G. J. (1997). ‘The effects of poverty on children’. The Future of Children, 7(2), 55-71.
• Brooks-Gunn, J., Han, W. J., & Waldfogel, J. (2013). ‘First-Year School Performance and Family Characteristics: Do Maternal and Paternal Education Matter?’. Developmental Psychology, 49(12), 2269–2282.
• Cantor, M. N., & Thorpe, L. (2018). ‘Integrating data on social determinants of health into electronic health records’. Health Affairs, 37(8), 1340–1341.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). ‘Social determinants of health’. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/health-disparities-hiv-std-tb-hepatitis/about/social-determinants-of-health.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). ‘Community Health Workers’. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/pubs/chw.htm
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). ‘National Diabetes Statistics Report’. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics/statistics-report.html
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2019). ‘ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting’. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd/ICD-10-CM_guidelines_2019_final.pdf
• Chetty, R., Stepner, M., Abraham, S., Lin, S., Scuderi, B., Turner, N., … & Cutler, D. (2016). ‘The association between income and life expectancy in the United States, 2001-2014’. JAMA, 315(16), 1750-1766.
• Chen, P. B., Kim, K., & Gottlieb, L. (2020). ‘Using big data to address social determinants of health’. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27(1), 164–168.
• Collaborative on Health Reform and Independent Living. (n.d.). ‘Disability disparities in social determinants of health’. Retrieved from https://www.chril.org/determinants
• Cook, P. J., & Ludwig, J. (2004). ‘The effects of gun prevalence on gunshot injuries: The case of public housing’. Journal of Public Economics, 88(3-4), 603-619.
• Creanga, A. A., Berg, C. J., Syverson, C., & Seed, K. (2014). ‘Prevalence of pregnancy-related mortality in the United States, 2006-2010’. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 123(5), 949-955.
• Currie, J. (2009). ‘Healthy, wealthy, and wise? The effects of health on work and welfare’. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(4), 1017-1062.
• Cutler, D. M., & Lleras-Muney, A. (2006). ‘Education and health: evaluating theories and evidence’. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 12352.
• Cutler, D. M., Lleras-Muney, A., & Vogl, T. (2014). ‘Socioeconomic status and health: Dimensions and mechanisms’. In Handbook of health economics (Vol. 2, pp. 211-256). Elsevier.
• Fraze, T., Lewis, J., & Rodriguez, H. P. (2019). ‘Leveraging Electronic Health Records to Support Social Service Integration in Health Care Organizations’. Medical Care Research and Review, 76(4), 427-440.
• Freudenberg, N. (2012). ‘Mass incarceration, public health, and the future of an unequal America’. American Journal of Public Health, 102(3), 392-395.
• Frumkin, H., Frank, L., & Jackson, R. J. (2004). Urban Sprawl and Public Health: Designing, Planning, and Building for Healthy Communities. Island Press.
• Gee, G. C., & Payne-Sturges, E. C. (2004). ‘Environmental health disparities: a framework for identifying underlying causes and promoting environmental justice’. Environmental Health Perspectives, 112(5), 164-171.
• Goldstein, S. L., Johnson, J. B., & Phelan, J. C. (2020). ‘The promises and perils of artificial intelligence for addressing social determinants of health’. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35(Suppl 2), S470-S472.
• Gottlieb, L. M., & Hessler, D. (2019). ‘From the clinic to the community: the ethical imperative to address social determinants of health’. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 47(3), 519-528.
• Gottlieb, L. M., Hessler, D., Long, D., Sweeney, K., Schrag, A., Adler, N., … & Schillinger, D. (2017). ‘Effects of a neighborhood resource navigator on food insecurity, unmet material needs, and depression’. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(10), 1515-1517.
• Gundersen, C., & Ziliak, J. P. (2015). ‘Food Insecurity and Health Outcomes’. Health Affairs, 34(11), 1830-1839.
• Health Affairs. (2017). ‘Addressing Social Determinants Of Health: Challenges, Opportunities, And Policy Implications’. Health Affairs Blog.
• Health Affairs. (2019). ‘Value-Based Payment And Social Determinants Of Health’. Health Affairs Blog.
• Heckman, J. J. (2006). ‘Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children’. Science, 312(5782), 1900-1902.
• Himmelstein, D. U., Warren, E., Thorne, D., & Woolhandler, S. (2009). ‘Medical bankruptcy in the United States, 2007: results of a national study’. American Journal of Medicine, 122(8), 741-746.
• Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010). ‘Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review’. PLoS Medicine, 7(7), e1000316.
• Hood, C. M., Gennuso, K. P., Maher, G. S., & Catlin, B. B. (2016). ‘County health rankings: relationships between median household income and health outcomes’. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 50(2), 129-138.
• Hoynes, H. W., Page, M. E., & Stevens, A. H. (2016). ‘Poverty in America: Trends and policy’. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(2), 119-140.
• Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. National Academies Press.
• Jackson, R. J. (2003). ‘The impact of the built environment on health: an emerging area of public health practice’. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1382-1384.
• Jones, C. P. (2000). ‘Levels of racism: a theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale’. American Journal of Public Health, 90(8), 1212-1215.
• Kangovi, S., Grande, D., Trinh-Shevrin, C., & Mechanic, R. E. (2018). ‘Evidence-based community health worker programs: A systematic review’. Medical Care, 56(7), 570-578.
• Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L. F. (2003). ‘Social cohesion, social capital, and health’. In L. F. Berkman & I. Kawachi (Eds.), Social Epidemiology (pp. 174–190). Oxford University Press.
• Kickbusch, I., & Gleicher, D. (2012). ‘Governance for health in the 21st century’. World Health Organization (Europe).
• Krahn, G. L., Disability and Health Research Team, & CDC. (2016). ‘The social determinants of health for people with disabilities: a framework for action’. Disability and Health Journal, 9(3), 405-412.
• Krieger, J., & Higgins, D. L. (2002). ‘Housing and health: Time for a new public health agenda’. American Journal of Public Health, 92(5), 758-768.
• Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. (1995). ‘Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease’. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36(Suppl), 80-94.
• Magnusson, R. S., Sainsbury, P., & Killingsworth, B. (2019). ‘Reorienting Health Systems Towards Social Determinants: The Role of Law and Governance’. Health and Human Rights, 21(1), 127-142.
• Marmot, M. (2010). Fair Society, Healthy Lives: The Marmot Review. The Marmot Review.
• Marmot, M. (2015). ‘The Health Gap: The Challenge of an Unequal World’. Bloomsbury Publishing.
• McLaughlin, K. A., Hatzenbuehler, M. L., & Galea, S. (2011). ‘Socioeconomic status and mental disorders in a nationally representative sample of US adults’. American Journal of Public Health, 101(9), 1732-1739.
• Mirowsky, J., & Ross, C. E. (2003). ‘Education, social status, and health’. Aldine Transaction.
• Mozaffarian, D., Ludwig, D. S., & Bray, G. A. (2011). ‘Policies to improve food choice, diet quality, and health’. British Medical Journal, 342, d204.
• National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). (2017). ‘PRAPARE Screening Tool’. Retrieved from https://prapare.org/
• Paasche-Orlow, M. K., & Wolf, M. S. (2007). ‘The causal pathways linking health literacy to health outcomes’. American Journal of Health Behavior, 31(Suppl 1), S10-S19.
• Pastor, M., Sadd, J., & Morello-Frosch, R. (2006). ‘This could be a better place: environmental justice in California’. California Policy Research Center.
• Phelan, J. C., Link, B. G., & Tehranifar, P. (2010). ‘Social conditions as fundamental causes of health inequalities: theory, evidence, and policy implications’. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51(Suppl), S28-S40.
• Pollack, C. E., Blackford, A., & Chang, H. Y. (2018). ‘Health care costs associated with social risk factors: a comparison of Medicaid and commercially insured populations’. Health Affairs, 37(8), 1221-1229.
• Pollack, C. E., & McDonald, E. M. (2010). ‘Housing and health: New directions for public health policy’. Public Health Reports, 125(Suppl 4), 164-169.
• Pettit, B., & Western, B. (2004). ‘Mass imprisonment and the life course: race and class inequality in U.S. incarceration’. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 151-169.
• Ricketts, T. C. (2000). ‘The changing nature of rural health care’. Annual Review of Public Health, 21(1), 639-657.
• Rosenthal, M. B. (2017). ‘Rural Health Challenges and Policy Options’. Journal of the American Medical Association, 317(10), 1017-1018.
• Rothstein, R. (2017). The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. Liveright Publishing.
• Singal, A., Waljee, A. K., & Nallamothu, B. K. (2019). ‘The perils of screening for social determinants of health’. JAMA Internal Medicine, 179(12), 1613-1614.
• Singh, G. K., & Siahpush, M. (2006). ‘Widening socioeconomic inequalities in US childhood mortality, 1969-2000’. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(1), 142-152.
• Sommers, B. D., Baicker, K., & Epstein, A. M. (2014). ‘Mortality and access to care among adults after state Medicaid expansions’. New England Journal of Medicine, 371(11), 1025-1034.
• Taylor, L., Gottlieb, L. M., & Goldstein, S. (2018). ‘Anchor Institutions and Social Determinants of Health: A Framework for Community-Engaged Practice’. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(Suppl 1), S3-S4.
• Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2010). ‘Community-based participatory research contributions to health disparities elimination: theory, challenges, and future directions’. American Journal of Public Health, 100(Suppl 1), S40-S46.
• Walker, R. E., Keane, C. R., & Burke, J. G. (2010). ‘Disparities in access to healthy food in the United States: A review of food desert literature’. Health & Place, 16(5), 876-884.
• Watts, N., Amann, M., Ayeb-Karlsson, S., Belesova, K., Bouley, T., Campbell-Lendrum, B., … & Romanello, M. (2018). ‘The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: from 25 years of inaction to a global response for public health’. The Lancet, 391(10120), 581-630.
• Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. Allen Lane.
• Williams, D. R., & Mohammed, S. A. (2013). ‘Racism and health I: Pathways and effects’. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(8), 1215-1233.
• Williams, D. R., & Wyatt, R. (2015). ‘Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health: Sociological Perspectives’. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 586-593). Elsevier.
• Wolf, M. S., & Paasche-Orlow, M. K. (2019). ‘Social Determinants of Health and the Ethics of Sharing Patient Data’. AMA Journal of Ethics, 21(1), E17-23.
• World Health Organization. (2013). ‘Health in All Policies: A Guide for Intersectoral Action for Health’. WHO.
• World Health Organization. (2025, May 6). ‘Social determinants of health’. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/social-determinants-of-health