Health disparities and outcomes
Health disparities and outcomes is a research topic within Health. Science Explorer counts 57k research works in it since 1950. 33.1% of them reached the world's top 10% most cited for their field and year.
This cluster of papers explores the impact of social determinants, such as social relationships, socioeconomic inequalities, loneliness, and neighborhood effects, on health outcomes and mortality risk. It delves into the complex interplay between social factors and health disparities, emphasizing the importance of addressing these issues for achieving health equity and improving public health.
- Social Relationships
- Socioeconomic Inequalities
- Loneliness
- Health Disparities
- Neighborhood Effects
- Mortality Risk
- Social Support
- Life Course Epidemiology
- Health Equity
- Public Health
- Research works
- 57k fractional, since 1950
- In the world top 10%
- 19k per year above
- Top-10% rate
- 33.1% share of its works in the world top 10%
- Growth, 2013–17 → 2018–22
- +64% the tick is no change
Which countries lead Health disparities and outcomes research?
By volume, the United States and China publish the most (4.6k and 1.6k works in 2022–2025).
By volume, 2022–2025
- 1 United States 4.6k works
- 2 China 1.6k works
- 3 United Kingdom 1.2k works
- 4 Canada 610 works
- 5 Australia 532 works
- 6 India 417 works
- 7 Germany 391 works
- 8 Japan 377 works
- 9 South Korea 330 works
- 10 Spain 315 works
How concentrated that is
The same countries as shares of everything the list above accounts for. A node where two countries do two thirds of the work and one spread evenly across twelve read alike as a ranking and not at all alike here.
Shares of the rows listed above, not of the whole node.
Which institutions lead Health disparities and outcomes research?
By volume in 2022–2025, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill publishes the most Health disparities and outcomes research, followed by University College London and University of Michigan.
By volume, 2022–2025
- 1 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill United States 107 works
- 2 University College London United Kingdom 106 works
- 3 University of Michigan United States 95 works
- 4 Johns Hopkins University United States 82 works
- 5 Harvard University United States 66 works
- 6 Peking University China 65 works
- 7 University of Southern California United States 59 works
- 8 University of Toronto Canada 58 works
- 9 New York University United States 51 works
- 10 Columbia University United States 49 works
Who are the leading researchers in Health disparities and outcomes?
The most-cited researchers publishing on Health disparities and outcomes include Christopher J L Murray, Simon I Hay and Theo Vos.
- 1 Christopher J L Murray 13k citations
- 2 Simon I Hay 12k citations
- 3 Theo Vos 12k citations
- 4 Ali H. Mokdad 10k citations
- 5 Rakhi Dandona 9.8k citations
- 6 Ronald C. Kessler 9.8k citations
- 7 Lalit Dandona 9.3k citations
- 8 G Anil Kumar 8.3k citations
- 9 Valery L. Feigin 7.9k citations
- 10 Jost B. Jonas 7.7k citations
Ranked by citations received across their whole record, among researchers with at least three works on this topic.
Where is Health disparities and outcomes research done?
The largest centres of Health disparities and outcomes research in 2022–2025 are London (United Kingdom), Beijing (China), New York (United States) and Seoul (South Korea). Among places with at least 20 works in it, it is an unusually large share of all research in Kalamazoo and Umeå.
Largest cities, 2022–2025
- 1 London United Kingdom 383 works
- 2 Beijing China 319 works
- 3 New York United States 207 works
- 4 Seoul South Korea 181 works
- 5 Boston United States 166 works
- 6 Baltimore United States 150 works
- 7 Los Angeles United States 136 works
- 8 Toronto Canada 136 works
- 9 Melbourne Australia 129 works
- 10 Tokyo Japan 126 works
Where it is the local speciality
- KalamazooUS · 23.2 works8.5×
- UmeåSE · 21.4 works6.1×
Location quotient: how much more of its research is in Health disparities and outcomes than the world average.
Where is the best place to study Health disparities and outcomes?
Among universities, judged by research, International Institute for Population Sciences, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and University of Massachusetts Boston score highest, combining excellence, specialisation, size, growth and international reach. Research strength is one signal when choosing where to study; it does not measure teaching.
One dot per university in the table below. The upper left is the interesting corner: small places doing unusually strong work.
| # | University | Score | Top 10% | Specialisation | Works | Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | International Institute for Population Sciences India | 71.5 | 45.4% | 99.0× | 45 | +134.5% |
| 2 | London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine United Kingdom | 58.8 | 32.7% | 10.3× | 21 | +21.2% |
| 3 | University of Massachusetts Boston United States | 57.4 | 14.9% | 22.2× | 32 | +196.1% |
| 4 | University College London United Kingdom | 57.1 | 30.3% | 5.7× | 106 | +50.0% |
| 5 | Renmin University of China China | 54.3 | 41.9% | 7.2× | 33 | +35.7% |
| 6 | Johns Hopkins University United States | 52.1 | 28.7% | 5.7× | 82 | +51.2% |
| 7 | University of Southern Denmark Denmark | 52.1 | 43.3% | 5.5× | 24 | +49.9% |
| 8 | Harvard University United States | 51.9 | 42.4% | 3.9× | 66 | +11.4% |
| 9 | University of Michigan United States | 51.7 | 29.3% | 5.2× | 95 | +52.9% |
| 10 | Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong | 51.6 | 32.9% | 3.9× | 37 | +122.0% |
Universities only. Score blends excellence (30%), specialisation (25%), size (20%), growth (15%) and international reach (10%), 2015–2022; growth compares 2010–14 with 2015–19.
Is Health disparities and outcomes research growing?
Output in 2018–2022 was 64% higher than in 2013–2017, peaking in 2021. The fastest-growing topics are Health disparities and outcomes.
The same series as a ribbon — one cell per year, darker for more. The line above answers how much; this answers when.
Which topics inside it are moving
Growth and decline on one axis around a shared zero. Two lists side by side hide the thing that matters: whether the growth dwarfs the decline, or the other way round.