Objectives Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) countries have made important progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets related to health (SDG3) at the national level. However, vast within-country health inequalities remain. We present a baseline of health inequalities in the region, against which progress towards the SDGs can be monitored. Setting We studied 21 countries in LAC using data from Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey carried out from 2011 to 2016 Participants The surveys collect nationally representative data on women and children using multistage sampling. In total, 288 207 women and 195 092 children made part of the surveys in the 21 countries. Outcome measures Five health intervention indicators were studied, related to reproductive and maternal health, along with adolescent fertility and neonatal and under-five mortality rates. Inequalities in these indicators were assessed through absolute and relative measures. Results In most countries, subnational geographical health gradients were observed for nearly all women, child, and adolescent (WCA) indicators. Coverage of key interventions was higher in urban areas and among the richest, compared with rural areas and poorer quintiles. Analyses by woman’s age showed that coverage was lower in adolescent girls than older women for family planning indicators. Pro-urban and pro-rich inequalities were also seen for mortality in most countries. Conclusions Regional averages hide important health inequalities between countries, but national estimates hide still greater inequalities between subgroups of women, children and adolescents. To achieve the SDG3 targets and leave no one behind, it is essential to close health inequality gaps within as well as between countries.

Background: Although most Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) countries made important progress in maternal and child health indicators from the 1990s up to 2010, little is known about such progress in the last decade. This study aims at documenting progress for each country as a whole, and to assess how within-country socioeconomic inequalities are evolving over time.Methods: We identified LAC countries for which a national survey was available between 2011–2015 and a second comparable survey in 2018–2020. These included Argentina, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Honduras, Peru, and Suriname. The 16 surveys included in the analysis collected nationally representative data on 221,989 women and 152,983 children using multistage sampling. Twelve health-related outcomes were studied, seven of which related to intervention coverage: the composite coverage index, demand for family planning satisfied with modern methods, antenatal care (four or more visits and eight or more visits), skilled attendant at birth, postnatal care for the mother and full immunization coverage. Five additional impact indicators were also investigated: stunting prevalence among under-five children, tobacco use by women, adolescent fertility rate, and under-five and neonatal mortality rates. For each of these indicators, average annual relative change rates were calculated between the baseline and endline national level estimates, and changes in socioeconomic inequalities over time were assessed using the slope index of inequality.Results: Progress over time and the magnitude of inequalities varied according to country and indicator. For countries and indicators where baseline levels were high, as Argentina, Costa Rica and Cuba, progress was slow and inequalities small for most indicators. Countries that still have room for improvements, such as Guyana, Honduras, Peru and Suriname, showed faster progress for some but not all indicators, although also had wider inequalities. Among the countries studied, Peru was the top performer in terms of increasing coverage and reducing inequalities over time, followed by Honduras. Declines in family planning and immunization coverage were observed in some countries, and the widest inequalities were present for adolescent fertility and antenatal care coverage with eight or more visits.Conclusions: Although LAC countries are well placed in terms of current levels of health indicators compared to most low- and middle-income countries, important inequalities remain, and reversals are being observed in some areas. More targeted efforts and actions are needed in order to leave no one behind. Monitoring progress with an equity lens is essential, but this will require further investment in conducting surveys routinely.

This study set out to describe the association between the maternal mortality ratio (MMR) estimates and a set of socioeconomic indicators and compute the MMR inequalities among the provinces of Ecuador. A cross-sectional ecological study was conducted, using data for 2014 from the country’s 24 provinces. The MMR estimate was calculated for each province, as well as the association and its strength between MMR and specific socioeconomic indicators. For the indicators that were found to be significantly associated with MMR, inequality measurements were computed. Despite a relatively low MMR for Ecuador overall, ratios differed substantially among the provinces. Five socioeconomic indicators proved to be statistically significantly associated with MMR: total fertility rate, the percentage of indigenous population, the percentage of households with children who do not attend school, gross domestic product, and the percentage of houses with electrical service. Of these five, only three had MMR inequalities that were significant: total fertility rate, gross domestic product, and the percentage of households with electricity. This study supports research arguing that national averages can be misleading, as they often hide differences among subgroups at the local level. The findings also suggest that MMR is significantly associated with some socioeconomic indicators, including ones linked with significant health outcome inequalities. In order to reduce health inequities, it is crucial that countries look beyond national averages and identify the subgroups being left behind, explore the particular social determinants that generate these health inequalities, and examine the specific barriers and other factors affecting the subgroups most vulnerable to maternal health inequalities.

Objective. To analyze temporal trends and inequalities in neonatal mortality between 2000 and 2020, and to set neonatal mortality targets for 2025 and 2030 in the Americas. Methods. A descriptive ecological study was conducted using 33 countries of the Americas as units of analysis. Both the percentage change and average annual percentage change in neonatal mortality rates were estimated. Measurements of absolute and relative inequality based on adjusted regression models were used to assess cross-country social inequalities in neonatal mortality. Targets to reduce neonatal mortality and cross-country inequalities were set for 2025 and 2030. Results. The estimated regional neonatal mortality rate was 12.0 per 1 000 live births in 2000–2004 and 7.4 per 1 000 live births in 2020, representing a percentage change of –38.3% and an average annual percentage change of –2.7%. National average annual percentage changes in neonatal mortality rates between 2000–2004 and 2020 ranged from –5.5 to 1.9 and were mostly negative. The estimated excess neonatal mortality in the 20% most socially disadvantaged countries, compared with the 20% least socially disadvantaged countries, was 17.1 and 9.8 deaths per 1 000 live births in 2000–2004 and 2020, respectively. Based on an extrapolation of recent trends, the regional neonatal mortality rate is projected to reach 7.0 and 6.6 neonatal deaths per 1 000 live births by 2025 and 2030, respectively. Conclusions. National and regional health authorities need to strengthen their efforts to reduce persistent social inequalities in neonatal mortality both within and between countries.

Background: The work of the WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health has been fundamental to provide a conceptual framework of the social determinants of health. Based on this framework, this study assesses the relationship of income inequality as a determinant of neonatal mortality in the Americas and relates it to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goal target 3.2 (reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 deaths per 1,000 live births). The rationale is to evaluate if income inequality may be considered a social factor that influences neonatal mortality in the Americas. Methods: Yearly data from 35 countries in the Americas during 2000–2019 was collected. Data sources include the United Nations Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation for the neonatal mortality rate (measured as neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births) and the United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research for the Gini index (measured in a scale from 0 to 100). This is an ecological study that employs a linear regression model that relates the neonatal mortality rate (dependent variable) to the Gini index (independent variable), while controlling for other factors that influence neonatal mortality. Coefficient estimates and their robust standard errors were obtained using panel data techniques. Results: A positive relationship between income inequality and neonatal mortality is found in countries in the Americas during the period studied. In particular, the analysis suggests that a unit increase in a country’s Gini index during 2000–2019 is associated with a 0.27 (95% CI [− 0.04, 0.57], P =.09) increase in the neonatal mortality rate. Conclusion: The analysis suggests that income inequality may be positively associated with the neonatal mortality rate in the Americas. Nonetheless, given the modest magnitude of the estimates and Gini values and trends during 2000–2019, the findings suggest a potential limited scope for redistributive policies to support reductions in neonatal mortality in the region. Thus, policies and interventions that address higher coverage and quality of services provided by national health systems and reductions in socio-economic inequalities in health are of utmost importance.

The Every Woman Every Child Latin America and the Caribbean (EWEC-LAC) initiative was established in 2017 as a regional inter-agency mechanism. EWEC-LAC coordinates the regional implementation of the Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), including adaptation to region specific needs, to end preventable deaths, ensure health and well-being and expand enabling environments for the health and well-being of women, children and adolescents. To advance the equitable achievement of these objectives, EWEC-LAC’s three working groups collectively support LAC countries in measuring and monitoring social inequalities in health, advocating for their reduction, and designing and implementing equity-oriented strategies, policies and interventions. This support for data-driven advocacy, capacity building, and policy and program solutions toward closing current gaps ensures that no one is left behind. Members of EWEC-LAC include PAHO, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN WOMEN, the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, USAID, LAC Regional Neonatal Alliance, and the LAC Regional Task Force for the Reduction of Maternal Mortality. To date, EWEC-LAC has developed and collected innovative tools and resources and begun to engage with countries to utilize them to reduce equity gaps. These resources include a framework for the measurement of social inequalities in health, data use and advocacy tools including a data dashboard to visualize trends in social inequalities in health in LAC countries, a methodology for setting targets for the reduction of inequalities, and a compendium of tools, instruments and methods to identify and address social inequalities in health. EWEC-LAC has also engaged regionally to emphasize the importance of recognizing these inequalities at social and political levels, and advocated for the reduction of these gaps. Attention to closing health equity gaps is ever more critical in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic which has exploited existing vulnerabilities. More equitable health systems will be better prepared to confront future health shocks.