for the Lancet NCDI Poverty Commission Study Group Executive summary"As we embark on this great collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind. Recognizing that the dignity of the human person is fundamental, we wish to see the goals and targets met for all nations and peoples and for all segments of society. And we will endeavour to reach the furthest behind first."Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development 1

No abstract

Introduction Physicians are increasingly being called on to address inequities created by social and structural determinants of health, yet few receive training in specific leadership skills that allow them to do so effectively. Methods We developed a workshop to introduce incoming medical interns from all specialties at Boston-area residency programs to community organizing as a framework for effective physician advocacy. We utilized didactic sessions, video examples, and small-group practice led by trained coaches to familiarize participants with one community organizing leadership skill—public narrative—as a means of creating the relationships that underlie collective action. We offered this 3-hour, cross-institutional workshop just prior to intern orientation and evaluated it through a postworkshop survey. Results In June 2019, 51 residents from 13 programs at seven academic medical centers attended this workshop. In the postworkshop survey, participants agreed with positive evaluative statements about the workshop's value and impact on their knowledge, with a mean score on all items of over 4 (5-point Likert scale, 1 = strongly disagree , 5 = strongly agree ; response rate: 34 of 51). Free-text comments emphasized the workshop's effectiveness in evoking positive feelings of solidarity, community, and professional identity. Discussion The workshop effectively introduced participants to community organizing and public narrative, allowed them to apply the principles of public narrative by developing their own stories of self, and demonstrated how these practices can be utilized in physician advocacy. The workshop also connected participants to their motivations for pursuing medicine and stimulated interest in more community organizing training.

This article examines an attempt to reconstitute global development governance in a context of growing influence for private finance. We focus on the World Bank's Human Capital Project (HCP) and Human Capital Index (HCI), which have stated aims of promoting economic growth and accelerating progress towards achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. Informed by a review of publicly available World Bank materials, we argue that, through its HCP and HCI, the World Bank is responding to its own institutional sidelining in development financing and governance with a strategy of reintermediation. Its leaders have pursued a system of governance in which the World Bank creates and instrumentalises knowledge on human capital -an asset to be accumulated through judicious investments in markets for self-betterment. Through its HCI the World Bank has expanded its global benchmarking practices, encompassing new domains and quantified predictions of future productivity, in the hope of shaping domestic policy processes. Its leaders propose to use HCI scores to signal risk to investors and political leaders, triggering political shocks that will spur policy reform. Crucially, these efforts seek to reassert the World Bank's epistemic authority and financing clout as the influence of its own lending wanes.

Medical sociology and science and technology studies (STS) emerged from different positions, but often closely related concerns, within the broad discipline of sociology. Their interface and areas of overlap have mostly been shaped by theoretical positions broadly considered "social constructionist. " Taken together, these perspectives provide empirical and theoretical tools to analyze important questions about how social inequalities, forms of scientific knowledge, and patterns of human health come to be produced and feedback into one another. Examining their intersection enables sociological questions such as: How is medical and public health scientific knowledge produced, stabilized, and taken as fact? How are scientific facts about health and illness used, experienced, and challenged? What is the relationship between health inequalities and public health or medical knowledge? This article seeks to briefly trace the important contributions that social constructionist research has made at the interstices of medical sociology and STS, further clarifying the history, points of intersection, and areas of diversion between them. The current COVID-19 pandemic has unveiled the political struggles that constitute public health scientific knowledge and circulation. The interface between STS and medical sociology can help us to make sense of the interrelationships between politics, power inequalities, and public health scientific knowledge.

Objectives: What did social science disciplines contribute to the study of global health before the coronavirus pandemic? This article compares the contributions of four major social science disciplines-anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology-to the study of global health. Methods: We assessed disciplinary contributions through analysis of Web of Science; disciplinary annual reviews; and each discipline's top two general focus journals, complemented by literature reviews. Results: Of the four disciplines, anthropology and economics have contributed relatively more in quantitative terms, although qualitative contributions have been refracted through the larger histories, methods, and theoretical concerns. Although interest in global health research has grown across the disciplines, only in anthropology has it achieved a measure of prominence in top journals. Conclusion: Cross-disciplinary comparison draws out how each discipline approaches global health; which topics it studies; and the topic's centrality/marginality within the broader disciplines.

No abstract