ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Integrating Social Determinants of Health in Medical Education: Shifting Future Physicians to Population Health-Centric Thinking and Practice.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rural health inequalities in perceived HIV vulnerability and nutritional status: a cross-comparison of rural communities in West and Southern Africa.BMC public health · 2026Article
- The Future of Health Professions Education.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contemporary medical education (ME) curricula are vastly devoid of affirmative integration of the social determinants of health (SDH) despite growing evidence of implications for future physicians' practice and influence on population health outcomes. Where incorporated, several programs still lack a population health-centric approach in curriculum design. Most publications focus on the academic implications from SDH integration in curricula. Our work extends to a more global perspective, highlighting the impacts of disparities in the integration of SDH on physicians' readiness and competence to influence population health outcomes. We highlight not just the inequitable integration across countries and ME programs, but also the significance for future physicians' thinking and approach to practice. From our work, we expect academic administrators to become more aware of the value of population-centric content in ME to address the global high burden of preventable diseases. We also hope to raise awareness among prospective students about the health needs of societies, driven by upstream determinants, and how such needs may reflect downward to patients' conditions. We conclude that affirmative SDH integration in ME is a necessary step to realigning medical practice for better population health outcomes, particularly in developing countries, where poorer health outcomes and socioeconomic conditions are closely interrelated. Our findings underscore the need for improving instructional design and content with a greater focus on global health impact, integrating the community as a learning space and source of co-educators, and realigning institutional policies to enable smoother SDH integration in curricula.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.