Social Determinants Of Health Framework Research Articles

A retrospective analysis of the social determinants of health affecting stroke outcomes in a small hospital situated in a health professional shortage area (HPSA).

Where someone lives is a major determinant of population health. In the United States, people who live in Health Professional Shortage Areas are considered medically underserved and have a higher propensity for conditions such as stroke, hypertension, and diabetes. Our goal was to better understand the diverse needs of patients presenting to the Crouse Hospital emergency department with stroke symptoms. Crouse Hospital is a small community hospital located in a shortage area serving both urban and rural populations in and around Syracuse, New York. Despite its small size, Crouse Hospital quickly became a major comprehensive stroke center in Central New York. With this study we assessed the social factors affecting the stroke patient population in the community and compared these characteristics between those living in served and underserved areas. Informed by the social determinants of health framework, we analyzed 1731 incidents of stroke that occurred between January 2019 and January 2021, and observed that the circumstances associated with stroke varied by service category and race, with White patients and those from served areas having better stroke outcomes compared to those residing in underserved areas and those that were not White. Our analyses help us to understand the underlying factors influencing the observed disparities and allow us to move forward by implementing informed community-based interventions to decrease stroke incidence and improve post-stroke care. Using our example other small hospitals can enact similar strategies to address the social determinants affecting their patients to improve stroke outcomes in their region.

Advancing migration and health research by examining return migration

This essay offers an analysis of research on return migration and health by adopting the social determinants of health (SDH) framework proposed by the WHO. Specifically, we argue that the...

The compounding impact of the social determinants of health and COVID-19 on the mental health of young workers in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative, arts-based study.

The COVID-19 pandemic, a global health crisis, was acutely felt in the labour market for many young workers. Importantly, precarious employment, identified as an emergent social determinant of health, may negatively affect the mental health and well-being of young workers. To this end, we engaged with young workers to understand their workplace needs and challenges in the COVID-19 era and hear their recommendations for action. Semi-structured interviews and a graphic recording focus group were conducted with 33 young workers aged 18-26 years old in Manitoba, Canada, who had worked a minimum of 30 hours per week prior to COVID-19 onset and were living independent of their parents. Analysis involved delineating units of meaning from the data, clustering these to form thematic statements and extracting themes. Second-level analysis involved applying themes and sub-themes to a social determinants of health framework. The multifaceted, compounding realities of young workers' pre-COVID-19 employment situations were amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic, adversely impacting young worker's mental health. Unique findings from this study highlight the generational differences in this cohort, who are opposed to participating in fragmented systemic structures (neoliberalism) and inequitable employment conditions, and who yearn for social inclusion and work-life balance. Their recommendations for government and employers call for permanent and stable employment opportunities, economic and mental health supports, and space to be heard and valued, as they navigate the many life course challenges as emerging adults. Societies are dependent on young workers to develop and support the Canadian economy for future generations. Thus, it is a critical that recommendations proposed by young workers in this study be acted upon and implemented to provide an equitable, stable, and supportive future for young workers in Canada and beyond.

Social Determinants of Health and Patients' Technology Acceptance of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Pilot Survey.

Telehealth has been widely adopted by patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many social determinants of health influence the adoption. This pilot study aimed to understand the social determinants of patients' adoption of telehealth in the context of the pandemic. A survey methodology was used to capture data from 215 participants using Amazon Mechanical Turk. The study was guided by the technology acceptance model and the social determinants of health framework. The questionnaire included technology acceptance model variables (eg, perceived usefulness [PU] and perceived ease of use [PEOU]), social determinants (eg, access to health care, socioeconomic status, education, and health literacy), and demographic information (eg, age, sex, race, and ethnicity). A series of ordinary least squares regressions were conducted to analyze the data using SPSS Statistics (IBM Corp). The results showed that social determinant factors-safe neighborhood and built environment (P=.01) and economic stability (P=.05)-are predictors of the PEOU of telehealth adoption at a statistically significant or marginally statistically significant level. Furthermore, a moderated mediation model (PROCESS model 85) was used to analyze the effects of COVID-19 on the neighborhood, built environment, and economic stability. PEOU and PU significantly positively affected users' intention to use technology for both variables. This study draws attention to 2 research frameworks that address unequal access to health technologies. It also adds empirical evidence to telehealth research on the adoption of patient technology. Finally, regarding practical implications, this study will provide government agencies, health care organizations, and health care companies with a better perspective of patients' digital health use. This will further guide them in designing better technology by considering factors such as social determinants of health.

Centering Health Equity Through the Social Determinants of Health, Interprofessional Education, and Sustainable Partnerships With Historically Black Colleges and Universities: Envisioning Upstream and Downstream Impacts.

The social determinants of health (SDOH) framework identifies barriers to health care, education, financial stability, and other conditions that exist across socially determined parameters, often to the detriment of Communities of Color. Postsecondary healthcare students must be aware of these disparities. In order to address upstream and downstream healthcare equity, the SDOH framework must be leveraged as a cross-disciplinary curricular innovation to support interprofessional education. Historically Black Colleges and Universities have unrealized potential to develop extraordinary healthcare leaders; partnerships integrating SDOH can be a powerful force to advance health equity in the United States.

Medical consequences of “contingency accommodation” for people seeking asylum: thematic analysis of a survey from professionals working in contingency accommodation

BackgroundConcerns about the housing of migrants and asylum seekers have escalated since the COVID-19 pandemic. From the use of quasi-detention facilities and so-called contingency accommodation to outbreaks of diphtheria in processing centres, there is a worrying trend to normalise potentially damaging conditions. The aim of this study was to assess the health risks posed by contingency housing for asylum seekers in the UK. MethodsIn this cross-sectional survey, a 10-point online questionnaire was sent to professional networks working with refugees and asylum seekers within the UK. Responses were collected between March 4, and April 11, 2022, using a mixture of convenience and snowballing sampling approach. The objectives of the survey were (1) to identify and document unmet needs, (2) to offer practical support, and (3) to map out services and organisation. The survey was designed by six medical professionals with experience of working with migrants and validated by three doctors who had experience running out-reach medical clinics for asylum seekers within contingency accommodation. Background details of geographical location and occupation were collected, and a combination of closed and open questions were used to collect information across five domains (medical, legal social, integration, and basic essentials) using a social determinants of health framework. A code book thematic analysis using a deductive/inductive hybrid approach was used to identify health and social needs as well as specific rights being denied. FindingsThere were 68 responses from around the UK, of which 30 (44%) were health-care professionals, and 38 (56%) were from the wider voluntary sector. 45 (67%) had visited an accommodation site, and 21 (33%) had worked with those living in contingency accommodation in other respects. Respondents reported observations regarding sites across most parts of the UK. Major themes of access to health-care, access to other services, barriers to access, and safeguarding were identified, with subthemes on access to primary care, maternity, and mental health services (eg, “Vast unmet need in mental health provision, several suicide attempts”); access to basic essential services (eg, “Food was not fit for purpose” “[c]hildren often did not receive breakfast”); education, and legal support; and frequent moving and communication. InterpretationThrough several themes we highlight the substantial impact of structural isolation of asylum seekers through contingency housing, its major effects on wellbeing and the exacerbation of health inequities. We are using these results to work with asylum seekers and local non-governmental organisations to campaign for improved housing conditions. Study limitations include sampling bias, and a lack of voices of those with lived experience. FundingNone.

8.H. Workshop: The commercial determinants of health strategies and tactics: cases from 3 health harming industries

Abstract The social determinants of health framework and the socioecological model have established the strong influence of the physical and wider social contexts on health and health inequities globally, although the circumstances where people live, work and grow up have been documented for a long time. These determinants can have health promoting and health damaging effects on population, environmental and planetary health. Recent scholarship on the commercial determinants of health focusing specifically on commercial actors, has exponentially proliferated and draws attention to for-profit industries, actors and strategies that promote products and choices which are detrimental to health. The recent Lancet series provides frameworks to better understand and regulate CDH, and has been endorsed by the WHO. This workshop aims to present the unethical health harming strategies and tactics of the for-profit sector with cases from three industries: the tobacco/vaping, the alcohol, and fossil fuel industries. The workshop begins with an overview of the commercial determinants, their multiple influences on people's well-being and their surroundings globally, and the strategies of action they use to market their products, influencing and threatening public health. The first case discusses how the vape industry advertises its Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems to youth, particularly targeting the young LGBTQ+ population. The second presentation describes the alcohol industry strategies, such as introducing beverages which have confusing definitions to indirectly advertise for alcohol brands where alcohol advertising is restricted, as well as undermining science and purging alliances with policy makers. The last presenter discusses further unethical efforts of the fossil fuel industry to hide evidence of the harms from benzene over more than half a century, promote false data and influence legislation. Implications for global policy and practice are offered. Key messages • Commercial determinants of health endanger one health and this require concerted global efforts. • Commercial actors influence public health though unethical strategies to promote their businesses.

Advancing Equity in Oncology: Innovative Approaches and Robust Frameworks to Address Cancer Health Disparities

The 2023 Summit on Cancer Health Disparities took place from April 28 through April 30, 2023. This manuscript summarizes three pivotal talks that underscored significant discussions on cancer inequities. Dr. Hiba Khan’s session, “Rising Tide of Biomarker Selected Studies – How Genomic Testing is Key to Unlocking Inequities in Oncology Clinical Trial Access,” delved into the vital role genomic testing plays in eliminating disparities within oncology clinical trials. The next session by Dr. Curtiland Deville, titled “Advanced Imaging and Stage Migration – How Findings More Diseases May Lead to More Opportunities,” explored how advanced imaging and disease stage migration can unearth further opportunities for equitable treatment access. Lastly, Dr. Samuel Washington’s presentation, “Applying a Social Determinant of Health Framework to Address Clinical Trial Inequities,” offered a thorough exploration into the use of social determinants of health as a strategy to rectify clinical trial inequities. Under the guidance of the session’s chair, Dr. Hala Borno, these presentations foster a nuanced understanding of cancer disparities, emphasizing the importance of innovative approaches and robust frameworks to bridge the gap in cancer care and research. This summary is an essential reference point for practitioners, policymakers, and stakeholders invested in overcoming the profound challenge of cancer disparities.

Social determinants of health as a framework to identify and assess cross-sector funding opportunities.

To present a content analysis and method for applying a social determinants of health (SDOH) analytical framework to legislation. Secondary data include 215 sections of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) and related information from federal government websites (e.g., press releases, notices of funding announcements, and funding tables). Researchers conducted a qualitative content analysis of legislative text, recording all sections, appropriations, allocations, and administrators. Using an SDOH analytical framework defined by Healthy People 2030, researchers coded each section, appropriation, and allocation within the legislation. Researchers reviewed all ARPA sections, appropriations, and allocations separately, resulting in 328 entries. Descriptive characteristics were calculated using Tableau and Microsoft Excel. Researchers coded each appropriation or allocation using definitions and key words presented in the SDOH analytical framework. Applying an SDOH analytical framework to the legislation's funding amounts reveals an overlap of investment opportunities that cross-sector initiatives can leverage. This overlap is seen primarily in two ways: (1) specific allocations and appropriations that can be used to meet multiple SDOH goals and (2) federal administrators receiving money that can be categorized according to multiple SDOHs. For example, approximately 99% of tracked ARPA funds can be used to support one or more SDOHs. Thirty-five appropriations or allocations can support programs categorized for more than one SDOH category. Eight departments received funds that could be designated for two or more SDOHs. All five SDOH categories can potentially receive funding from 3 to 11 federal administrators. Using an SDOH analytical framework is an innovative approach to conceptualizing and synthesizing the contents of complex legislation. This approach demonstrates funding patterns across SDOH that can encourage cross-sector collaborations. Future content analysis of legislation can employ this SDOH framework to demonstrate cross-sector initiative funding opportunities.

Exploring configurations of social determinants for enhancing older adult health in China: an fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis based on 31 provinces in China.

With China's aging population on the rise, addressing population aging has become a national priority, particularly focusing on improving older adult health. This study employs the social determinants of health framework, considering China's unique macro-social, economic, policy, healthcare, and family cultural factors, to develop a framework for understanding the social determinants of health for older adult in China. Using the fsQCA method and a configurational perspective, the complex relationship between social determinants of health and older adult health status is examined. The findings indicate that individual social determinants alone are insufficient for achieving high levels of older adult health. Instead, three configurations of social determinants have been identified as conducive to high older adult health: Economic Development-Environment - Cultural Dominant Type, Socio-Economic Development - Older Adult Security - Environment - Cultural Dominant Type, and Economic Development Dominant Type. These configurations offer diverse pathways for enhancing older adult health. Conversely, the study identifies two configurations associated with low older adult health levels, exhibiting an asymmetric relationship with the configurations resulting in high older adult health levels. Moreover, economic development consistently emerges as a core condition across all three configurations associated with high older adult health levels, while two configurations associated with low older adult health lack this core condition. These findings underscore the universal contribution of enhancing economic development to improving older adult health.

Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health Among Healthcare Workers in India: A Mixed-methods Systematic Review.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) experienced significant mental health challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aimed to comprehensively assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of HCWs in India. We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review, which adopts a results-based convergent approach that incorporates quantitative and qualitative data. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in relevant databases: PubMed-Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest. All available full-text studies in the English language that assessed the mental health outcomes (anxiety, stress, and depression) of HCWs during the pandemic and published until 28 February 2022 were included. A total of 31 studies were included in this review (27 quantitative studies, three qualitative studies, and one mixed-method study). The pooled prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress among HCWs in India was 32.96%, 29.49%, and 33.47%, respectively. Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings using social determinants of health framework resulted in various contributing factors and coping strategies. There is a need for a supportive work environment, mental health support, and mental health policies for HCWs in India.

Integration of the social determinants of health into quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review protocol

IntroductionQuality monitoring is a critical component of high-performing cancer care systems. Quality indicators (QIs) are standardised, evidence-based measures of healthcare quality that allow healthcare systems to track performance, identify gaps...

Determinants of Inequities in Neurologic Disease, Health, and Well-being: The NINDS Social Determinants of Health Framework.

A National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke working group developed the Determinants of Inequities in Neurological Disease, Health, and Well-being framework. Our goal was to guide and inspire a new generation of neurologic research that pushes the field to design and test new approaches in pursuit of health equity, population health, and social justice. We seek to expand the lens of those looking to reduce or eliminate racial, socioeconomic status, and other inequities in neurologic disease, health, and well-being to improve our collective ability to create research, programs, and policies that lead to larger, more impactful, and more sustainable change in neurologic disease patterns. In this context, we outline a framework that includes and highlights "upstream" factors in the hopes of enhancing the focus of research, programmatic, and policy efforts to reduce and eliminate inequities in neurologic health and well-being. We explicitly discuss racism and other structural factors to clarify that social determinants are not natural and unchangeable. Populations with a disproportionate burden of neurologic disease are not inherently deficient, despite what some approaches to framing health inequities imply. The framework is presented linearly, but the pathways linking the determinants of neurologic disease, health, and well-being are far more complex than those demonstrated by the arrows included in the figure. The framework highlights the different levels and scale of causation, including the structural and intermediary social determinants and their impact on neurologic health. We offer this framework to refine efforts to contextualize the interpretation of neurologic research findings and suggest new avenues for their application. We illustrate how behavioral and biological factors occur in a social and economic context, factors that have been understudied as points of intervention to reduce inequities in neurologic disease. Considering social and structural determinants of health provides promising new opportunities to achieve neurologic health equity, reach social justice, and improve our science. Extending our work in this fashion is not simply about health equity or social justice but to fundamentally improve the quality of neurologic research by enhancing underlying theory and improving study design and implementation.

A cross-sectional study on social determinants of mental health during COVID-19 among adults in California.

To explore the impact of structural and intermediary social determinants of health (SDoH) on Californian adults' mental health during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional study used data from the 2020 cycle of the California Health Interview Survey, the largest US state-level population health survey. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to analyse the data. Using a general social determinant of health framework, we operationalized different survey questions to measure structural and intermediary determinants of mental health. Mental health during the early phase of COVID-19 among adults in California was associated with age, gender, health conditions, delayed care, employment status (loss of job or reduced income) and discrimination. People in higher social strata were more likely to have better mental health for many of these factors. This study supports the assertion that material circumstances (such as employment status) and discrimination are associated with experiencing mental health issues among adults in California during COVID-19. Racism is a public health issue, and as nurses, addressing racism is critical. In addition, much work is needed to address SDoH to improve health outcomes, especially among marginalized populations. This study addressed the knowledge gap concerning the social determinants of mental health among Californian adults during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Those who had reduced income and those who lost their jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic were 46% and 56%, respectively, more likely to report mental health problems. Those who experienced discrimination in healthcare were 304% more likely to report mental health issues. This research will increase the understanding of the social determinants of health, particularly for those with chronic illnesses and mental health issues during the COVID-19 pandemic. No patient or public contribution, as we used an existing US state dataset. However, California Health Interview Survey is the largest state health survey in the United States and interviews more than 20,000 households each year representing the health care needs of Californians.

Individual and structural determinants of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in a marginalized community in the United States

Socially and medically vulnerable groups (e.g., people 65 years or older, minoritized racial groups, non-telework essential workers, and people with comorbid conditions) experience barriers to COVID-19 prevention and treatment, increased burden of disease, and increased risk of death from COVID-19. Researchers are paying increased attention to social determinants of health (SDH) in explaining inequities in COVID-19-related health outcomes and rates of vaccine uptake. The purpose of the present manuscript is to identify clinically significant predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who were socially and medically vulnerable to SARs-CoV-2 infection. Analysis was informed by the SDH framework and included a sample of 641 baseline surveys from participants in a clinical trial designed to increase COVID-19 testing. All participants were at high risk of developing COVID-19-related complications or dying from COVID-19. Following community-based participatory research principles, a well-established community collaborative board conducted every aspect of the study. Multiple logistic regressions were conducted to examine the relationships between individual and structural factors and COVID-19 vaccine uptake. In the final time adjusted model, we found that vaccine uptake was only predicted by specific individual-level factors: being 65 years and older, living with HIV/AIDS, and having previously received a flu vaccine or a COVID-19 test. Those reporting to believe in COVID-19-conspiracy theories were less likely to get the COVID-19 vaccine. More research is needed to identify predictors of vaccine uptake among people with comorbidities that make them more vulnerable to COVID-19 complications or death.

Spatializing stigma-power: Mental health impacts of spatial stigma in a legally-excluded settlement in Mumbai, India.

In disadvantaged neighborhoods such as informal settlements (or "slums" in the Indian context), infrastructural deficits and social conditions have been associated with residents' poor mental health. Within social determinants of health framework, spatial stigma, or negative portrayal and stereotyping of particular neighborhoods, has been identified as a contributor to health deficits, but remains under-examined in public health research and may adversely impact the mental health of slum residents through pathways including disinvestment in infrastructure, internalization, weakened community relations, and discrimination. Based on analyses of individual interviews (n = 40) and focus groups (n = 6) in Kaula Bandar (KB), an informal settlement in Mumbai with a previously described high rate of probable common mental disorders (CMD), this study investigates the association between spatial stigma and mental health. The findings suggest that KB's high rate of CMDs stems, in part, from residents' internalization of spatial stigma, which negatively impacts their self-perceptions and community relations. Employing the concept of stigma-power, this study also reveals that spatial stigma in KB is produced through willful government neglect and disinvestment, including the denial of basic services (e.g., water and sanitation infrastructure, solid waste removal). These findings expand the scope of stigma-power from an individual-level to a community-level process by revealing its enactment through the actions (and inactions) of bureaucratic agencies. This study provides empirical evidence for the mental health impacts of spatial stigma and contributes to understanding a key symbolic pathway by which living in a disadvantaged neighborhood may adversely affect health.

Population-level SDOH and Pediatric Asthma Health Care Utilization: A Systematic Review.

Spatial analysis is a population health methodology that can determine geographic distributions of asthma outcomes and examine their relationship to place-based social determinants of health (SDOH). To systematically review US-based studies analyzing associations between SDOH and asthma health care utilization by geographic entities. Pubmed, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Empirical, observational US-based studies were included if (1) outcomes included asthma-related emergency department visits or revisits, and hospitalizations or rehospitalizations; (2) exposures were ≥1 SDOH described by the Healthy People (HP) SDOH framework; (3) analysis occurred at the population-level using a geographic entity (eg, census-tract); (4) results were reported separately for children ≤18 years. Two reviewers collected data on study information, demographics, geographic entities, SDOH exposures, and asthma outcomes. We used the HP SDOH framework's 5 domains to organize and synthesize study findings. The initial search identified 815 studies; 40 met inclusion criteria. Zip-code tabulation areas (n = 16) and census-tracts (n = 9) were frequently used geographic entities. Ten SDOH were evaluated across all HP domains. Most studies (n = 37) found significant associations between ≥1 SDOH and asthma health care utilization. Poverty and environmental conditions were the most often studied SDOH. Eight SDOH-poverty, higher education enrollment, health care access, primary care access, discrimination, environmental conditions, housing quality, and crime - had consistent significant associations with asthma health care utilization. Population-level SDOH are associated with asthma health care utilization when evaluated by geographic entities. Future work using similar methodology may improve this research's quality and utility.

Social Determinant of Health Framework to Examine the Impact of COVID-19 on Latino Health.

Evaluated how COVID-19 impacted Latino health across social, economic, and emotional dimensions and differentiated whether adverseCOVID-19-related effects persisted across respondents. In both English and Spanish, a cross-sectional survey was conducted in the USA from June 2021 to April 2022. Chi-square tests, Z-tests, and T-tests were used to test for significant differences between Spanish- and English-speaking respondents. Multiple linear regressions were carried out to understand whether previously established determinants of health for Latinos accounted for greater COVID-19-related adversity across social, economic, and mental health dimensions. English as a primary language was significantly related to greater adverse emotional/mental health COVID-19 experiences after controlling for other social determinants of healthfactors (β = - 0.355, p < 0.001). Individuals who reported worrying about housing loss were significantly more likely to experience more adverse economic adversity due to COVID-19 (β = - 0.234, p < 0.001). Household income < $35,000 (β = 0.083, p < 0.05), having more than 5 people living in the same home (β = -0.102, p < 0.05), and work-related transportation barriers (β = - 0.114, p < 0.05) all increased the likelihood of household-related stressors occurring because of the pandemic. The study highlights the heterogeneity in the Latino community and the key social, economic, and community-level factors most strongly correlated with adverse COVID-19-related outcomes.

Recent Advances on Social Determinants of Mental Health: Looking Fast Forward.

The fields of psychiatry and mental health are increasingly recognizing the importance of social determinants of health (SDOH) and their impact on mental health outcomes. In this overview, the authors discuss the recent research, from the past 5 years, on advances made in SDOH work. SDOH frameworks and theories have expanded to include more social conditions, from traumas associated with immigration to psychosocial and community strengths, that impact mental health and well-being. Research has consistently shown the pervasive deleterious impacts of inequitable social conditions (e.g., food insecurity, housing instability) on minoritized populations' physical and mental health. Social systems of oppression (e.g., racism, minoritization) have also been shown to confer higher risk for psychiatric and mental disorders. The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated the inequitable impact of the social determinants of health outcomes. More efforts have been made in recent years to intervene on the social determinants through interventions at the individual, community, and policy levels, which have shown promise in improving mental health outcomes in marginalized populations. However, major gaps remain. Attention should be paid to developing guiding frameworks that incorporate equity and antiracism when designing SDOH interventions and improving methodological approaches for evaluating these interventions. In addition, structural-level and policy-level SDOH efforts are critical for making long-lasting and impactful advances toward mental health equity.

Social determinants of health in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic: strengths and limitations of emergency responses.

Economic crises often expose the most vulnerable to higher health risks and tend to exacerbate existing inequalities. The Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) framework illustrates many layers of inequalities that would affect outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic. The impacts of emergency policy responses considering the SDoH framework are important for all sectors in policymaking. However, its assessment in Global South countries is limited, due to high informality rates and data availability. We address this gap using a unique dataset that allows for the analysis of occupational categories before and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil, incorporating the emergency assistance provided in 2020. Results show that, although labor earnings fell 4% for the self-employed at each death from COVID-19, increasing unemployment and inactivity among the typically most vulnerable, those effects were offset by emergency policies, reducing poverty. Groups often considered less vulnerable, such as formal employees, had an increase. The policy responses to this shock served then as a leveler of previous SDoH, despite ignoring the health-risk gradient there is along the income distribution. A poverty rebound that ensued after the sudden discontinuation of those policies is a lesson for future crises, and on how SDoH inequalities should be addressed.