MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116716555 · doi:10.12707/rvi25.41.41284

Determinantes Sociais e Desigualdades em Saúde nas Américas e no Caribe: Scoping Review

2025· article· en· W7116716555 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Almeida, Juana Suárez Conejero, Michele Hortelan, AIDA MARIS PERES

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Enfermagem Referência · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthInequalitySocial determinants of healthHealth equityPopulationSocial inequalityPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Health inequalities in the Americas and the Caribbean are strongly influenced by Social Determinants of Health (SDOH), reflecting structural disparities that directly affect population well-being. Objective: To map the SDOH addressed in scientific literature from the region over the past decade, identifying patterns, challenges, and implications for health equity. Methodology: A scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and PRISMA 2024 checklist, with protocol registered in the Open Science Framework. A total of 30 studies published between 2015 and 2024 were analyzed, covering nine countries. Results: The main SDOH identified were racial and residential segregation, food insecurity, mental health, access to healthcare, gender, education, immigration, and sanitation. The most represented countries were Brazil, the United States, and Canada. Conclusion: The findings show that inequalities related to race, education, housing, and mental health are critical determinants of health inequities. The mapping highlights the urgency of intersectoral policies and professional training strategies aligned with these challenges, supporting the development of more equitable and responsive health systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0210.022
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.196
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de Enfermagem ReferênciaSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207