Rachana SinghEditorial on the Research Topic
Neonatal outcomes - what about sex, race(ism) and social determinants of health?
While the majority of newborns are born healthy at term gestational age, advancements in medical/surgical interventions in the field of neonatal care have allowed many newborns with complex disorders at birth to survive, albeit with the potential for long-term morbidities and at risk for neurodevelopmental deficits (1). This is evident in the increased survival of preterm infants with complications associated with preterm birth, along with term infants with congenital medical and surgical disorders (2–4). Some growing evidence suggests that variations in neonatal outcomes cannot be explained solely by illness severity and clinical interventions. There are likely additional factors at play that can negatively impact outcomes, and identifying some modifiable risk factors could help mitigate the inequities in outcomes (5–7). Also, while it is well known that race is a social construct, it continues to be reported in ongoing studies leading to biases in care provision with resultant inequities in neonatal outcomes (8).
Currently, there is a limited body of literature highlighting the influence of neonatal sex, race(ism), and maternal Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) on neonatal outcomes. It is a common adage in Pediatrics that male infants will have relatively poorer outcomes compared to female infants, but the reason why is still unanswered. Historically, race has been tied to health outcomes, sending an erroneous message with a significant impact on the care provided to people of color and minorities. Finally, disparities in accessing healthcare based on one's socioeconomic status and the neighborhood one lives in are documented for adults and children. The aim of this research topic was to describe the scientific rationale for the role infant sex plays; how we can eliminate the influence of race(ism) on neonatal outcomes, and how we can effectively address SDoH-related modifiable factors through early identification and public health policies that support families and newborns affected by them.
When exploring the role of sex in neonatal outcomes, it is quite obvious that the complexity of the interplay between maternal- placental-offspring factors is closely tied to neonatal sex, especially when focusing on specific neonatal disorders (Madurai et al., Alur et al.). Fetal sex, either secondary to chromosome-specific gene activation/deactivation regulation and/or genetic material, can alter placental functioning, thereby impacting both maternal and fetal health (9, 10). Studies focusing on maternal pregnancy outcomes based on fetal sex have demonstrated a higher cardiovascular and metabolic load for the mother, resulting in poor obstetric outcomes, including but not limited to pregnancy-induced hypertension, gestational diabetes, and preterm birth (11, 12). Male infants have a higher risk of mortality and other morbidities in the neonatal period compared to female infants (13) (Chaudhary and Meharwal). Awareness of these sex-based differential outcomes can help advance the field of personalized medicine, improving prognostication and guiding therapies (14, 15).
While it is well known that race is a social construct, it continues to be reported in medical literature as having biological plausibility, thereby leading to inequities in healthcare provision, utilization, and outcomes (16–19). When delving deeper, it quickly becomes apparent that the differences reported by race are likely secondary to socioeconomic disparities, access to care, and health literacy (Call et al., Konzett et al., Li et al.). By focusing on these modifiable factors through guided resource utilization, an improvement in neonatal outcomes can be achieved (Belay et al., Wogayehu et al.). In high-income countries, there has been a steady improvement in neonatal outcomes that continues to be sustained even with lower limits of viability and more complex neonatal diagnoses (Li et al., Konzett et al.). With the significant advances made in the fields of genetics and epigenetics, it is time to incorporate these biological variables into future research rather than continuing to focus on race-based outcomes (20). Not only will this strategy improve diagnostics, but it will also allow for more targeted therapeutic opportunities (21–23).
Thus, the future of neonatal care improvement warrants not only incorporating personalized medicine methodologies that focus on biological variables when developing therapeutics, but also systematically eradicating the inequities that persist secondary to socio-economic status.
Author contributions
RS: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Kieran E, Sara R, Claydon J, Hait V, de Salaberry J, Osiovich H, et al. Outcomes of neonates with complex medical needs. Adv Neonatal Care. (2019) 19(4):275–84. doi: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000639
2. Ahmed AM, Grandi SM, Pullenayegum E, McDonald SD, Beltempo M, Premji SS, et al. Short-term and long-term mortality risk after preterm birth. JAMA Netw Open. (2024) 7(11):e2445871. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.45871
3. Available online at: https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-survival/neonatal-mortality/ (Accessed September 1, 2025).
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Infant mortality. Available online at: https://www.cdc.gov/maternal-infant-health/infant-mortality/index.html (Accessed September 1, 2025).
5. Tamir TT. Neonatal mortality rate and determinants among births of mothers at extreme ages of reproductive life in low and middle income countries. Sci Rep. (2024) 14(1):12596. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-61867-w
6. Okobi OE, Ibanga IU, Egbujo UC, Egbuchua TO, Oranu KP, Oranika US. Trends and factors associated with mortality rates of leading causes of infant death: a CDC wide-ranging online data for epidemiologic research (CDC WONDER) database analysis. Cureus. (2023) 15(9):e45652. doi: 10.7759/cureus.45652
7. Enyew EF, Getnet M, Gebiru AM, Dessie G. Individual and community level determinants of neonatal mortality in sub saharan Africa: findings from recent demographic and health survey data. Ital J Pediatr. (2025) 51(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s13052-025-01997-7
8. Swilley-Martinez ME, Coles SA, Miller VE, Alam IZ, Fitch KV, Cruz TH, et al. “We adjusted for race”: now what? A systematic review of utilization and reporting of race in American Journal of Epidemiology and Epidemiology, 2020–2021. Epidemiol Rev. (2023) 45(1):15–31. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxad010
9. Braun AE, Mitchel OR, Gonzalez TL, Sun T, Flowers AE, Pisarska MD, et al. Sex at the interface: the origin and impact of sex differences in the developing human placenta. Biol Sex Differ. (2022) 13:50. doi: 10.1186/s13293-022-00459-7
10. Meakin AS, Cuffe JSM, Darby JRT, Morrison JL, Clifton VL. Let’s talk about placental sex, baby: understanding mechanisms that drive female- and male-specific fetal growth and developmental outcomes. Int J Mol Sci. (2021) 22(12):6386. doi: 10.3390/ijms22126386
11. Al-Qaraghouli M, Fang YMV. Effect of fetal sex on maternal and obstetric outcomes. Front Pediatr. (2017) 5:144. doi: 10.3389/fped.2017.00144
12. Broere-Brown ZA, Adank MC, Benschop L, Tielemans M, Muka T, Goncalves R, et al. Fetal sex and maternal pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biol Sex Differ. (2020) 11:26. doi: 10.1186/s13293-020-00299-3
13. Thompson E, Kassa GM, Fite RO, Pons-Duran C, Goddard FGB, Worku A, et al. Birth outcomes and survival by sex among newborns and children under 2 in the Birhan cohort: a prospective cohort study in the Amhara region of Ethiopia. BMJ Glob Health. (2024) 9(8):e015475. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015475
14. Mazza M, Lisci FM, Brisi C, Traversi G, Gaetani E, Pola R, et al. Beyond one-size-fits-all: personalized medicine and future directions in sex-based psychopharmacological treatment. Future Pharmacol. (2024) 4(3):541–63. doi: 10.3390/futurepharmacol4030030
15. Feng Z, Liao M, Zhang L. Sex differences in disease: sex chromosome and immunity. J Transl Med. (2024) 22(1):1150. doi: 10.1186/s12967-024-05990-2
16. Nana Sede Mbakop R, Forlemu AN, Ugwu C, Soladoye E, Olaosebikan K, Obi ES, et al. Racial differences in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding: a nationwide study. Cureus. (2024) 16(6):e61982. doi: 10.7759/cureus.61982
17. Slopen N, Chang AR, Johnson TJ, Anderson AT, Bate AM, Clark S, et al. Racial and ethnic inequities in the quality of paediatric care in the USA: a review of quantitative evidence. Lancet Child Health Adolesc. (2024) 8(2):147–58. doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(23)00251-1
18. Marcondes FO, Normand SL, Le Cook B, Huskamp HA, Rodriguez JA, Barnett ML, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in telemedicine use. JAMA Health Forum. (2024) 5(3):e240131. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.0131
19. Chan PS, Girotra S, Blewer A, Kennedy KF, McNally BF, Benoit JL, et al. Race and sex differences in the association of bystander CPR for cardiac arrest. Circulation. (2024) 150(9):677–86. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068732
20. Agrawal P, Kaur J, Singh J, Rasane P, Sharma K, Bhadariya V, et al. Genetics, nutrition, and health: a new frontier in disease prevention. J Am Nutr Assoc. (2024) 43(4):326–38. doi: 10.1080/27697061.2023.2284997
21. Vivante A. Genetics of chronic kidney disease. N Eng J Med. (2024) 391(7):627–39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra2308577
22. Eldemire R, Mestroni L, Taylor MR. Genetics of dilated cardiomyopathy. Annu Rev Med. (2024) 75(1):417–26. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-052422-020535
Keywords: sex, race, SDOH, neonates, genetics
Citation: Singh R (2025) Editorial: Neonatal outcomes - what about sex, race(ism) and social determinants of health?. Front. Pediatr. 13:1723226. doi: 10.3389/fped.2025.1723226
Received: 12 October 2025; Accepted: 31 October 2025;
Published: 13 November 2025.
Edited and Reviewed by: David Warburton, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, United States
Copyright: © 2025 Singh. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Rachana Singh, cmFjaGFuYS5zaW5naDFAdHVmdHNtZWRpY2luZS5vcmc=
†ORCID:
Rachana Singh
orcid.org/0000-0001-7783-1214