Dr. Parvati Singh is an Assistant Professor in the Division of Epidemiology within the College of Public Health at The Ohio State University. Her work bridges epidemiology and demography, focusing on population-level mental health, maternal and child health, and the social and policy contexts that shape these outcomes. Drawing on large datasets and causal-inference methods, Dr. Singh studies how external shocks such as economic recessions, policing policies, and court decisions impact public health across diverse populations.
Q. What is your position, and what department/division/college are you in?
I am an Assistant Professor in the Division of Epidemiology in the College of Public Health at Ohio State.
Q. How long have you been at OSU, and how long have you been connected to IPR?
I joined Ohio State in Fall 2021, and this fall will mark my fifth year here. I have been connected with the Institute for Population Research (IPR) since my very first semester, when I applied for, and was fortunate to receive, an IPR seed grant. Since then, I have regularly attended the IPR seminar series and come to see IPR as an extension of my own division rather than a separate entity.
Q. Describe your main research interests in a few sentences.
My research examines population-level health outcomes, primarily mental health and maternal and child health, through the lens of large-scale societal disruptions. I study how external shocks, such as economic recessions, the COVID-19 pandemic, or major policy changes like the Dobbs decision, affect population health. Using epidemiologic and causal-inference methods, I aim to disentangle causation from correlation and better understand how structural forces shape wellbeing.
Q. Which of your current projects are you most excited about?
I am most excited about a project funded by the National Institute of Mental Health that examines suicides among Black youth and their relationship to police hyper-surveillance. In this study, I analyze the impact of New York City’s stop-and-frisk policy on suicide rates among Black populations and extend the work nationally using Stanford’s open policing database. The project leverages a natural-experiment design — specifically, the abrupt 2012 federal ruling that declared stop-and-frisk unconstitutional — to assess causal links between policing intensity and mental-health outcomes.
Q. What drew you to IPR, and how do you benefit from your involvement with IPR?
I was drawn to IPR because of its strong interdisciplinary community. As a public-health researcher deeply engaged with sociological and demographic questions, IPR provided the perfect intellectual home. The seminars, data resources, and mentorship have been invaluable. I’ve also benefited from collaborations with IPR colleagues and from hiring sociology graduate research assistants, many of whom have made significant contributions to my projects. For me, IPR has been a constant source of community, rigor, and joy throughout my time at Ohio State.
Q. What has been the biggest impact of your work, or what do you hope for future impacts for your work?
My research has sparked meaningful discussions at both policy and academic levels. For example, my paper on the impact of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision on infant mortality was referenced by Michelle Obama in a public address, and my work on sanitation and child health in India was shared by the country’s Prime Minister. Beyond these recognitions, my greatest source of fulfillment has been seeing how my findings inform classroom discussions and inspire students to pursue their own research questions. At this stage in my career, I view impact not only in policy terms but also in deepening understanding — my own and others’ — of how population health patterns change in response to major societal shifts.
Q. How did you come to this career and to your research area?
I was born and raised in India, where I initially studied biomedical engineering. After the 2008 recession limited job prospects, I pursued a postgraduate diploma in rural management, which required immersive work in rural villages. That experience profoundly changed my perspective. I later joined the World Bank, working on rural development and women’s empowerment initiatives across more than 1,200 villages. Those years taught me how policy design and implementation affect communities, but they also revealed my desire to understand causality and impact more rigorously. I moved to the United States for a master’s in public policy at the University of Texas at Austin, then pursued a PhD in public health. These experiences solidified my interest in population-level, data-driven research on health and inequality.
Q. How does your personal or professional background shape the topics you are interested in or the way you do research?
My training has always been quantitatively focused — from engineering through epidemiology — which has shaped my attraction to large-scale data analysis and causal methods. But my years working in rural India also gave me a deep appreciation for community context and the lived realities behind data. Much of my work now attempts to bridge those perspectives: to capture individual experiences within population-level trends and to ensure that statistical insights can translate into meaningful improvements in people’s lives.
Q. What is the research finding you’re most proud of?
I am most proud of my research on sanitation and child health in India, which demonstrated that improving sanitation infrastructure and practices significantly reduces infant mortality and child undernutrition. These studies have not only been published in prominent journals but also influenced public dialogue around India’s national sanitation campaign, showing how research can motivate and sustain progress in public health.
Q. What is the research finding you’ve been most surprised by?
One of my most surprising findings was that state-level bans on payday lending in the U.S. led to reductions in preterm births. Payday lending functions as a form of toxic macroeconomic exposure — linked to stress, risky consumption, and adverse health outcomes — and seeing the data clearly confirm this connection was striking. The result highlights how economic policies, often viewed as outside the realm of health, can profoundly influence population wellbeing.
Q. What kinds of collaborative research have you been involved in?
Nearly all of my research is collaborative. I prefer working in small, interdisciplinary teams that bring together perspectives from public health, sociology, medicine, and policy. Many of my partnerships extend across institutions and disciplines, such as work with scholars in sociology and criminal justice or with clinicians studying maternal and child health. I have also published with IPR affiliates, including Dr. Maria Gallo, and am continuing to build new collaborations within the IPR network.
Q. What kinds of service to the field are you involved in, and how does this service fit into your professional goals?
I mentor graduate and undergraduate students, serve as an academic editor for PLOS Global Public Health, and am active in professional associations such as the Population Association of America and the Society for Epidemiologic Research. These roles allow me to contribute to shaping the field while learning from peers and emerging scholars. Service keeps me grounded in community — both as a mentor and as a learner.
Q. Do you do any public-facing communication or dissemination of your work? How did you get started with this form of engagement? What have your experiences been? Why do you think it’s important for you?
I have engaged with media primarily around my work on the Dobbs decision and infant mortality. Following publication, I spoke with numerous news outlets to contextualize the findings. It was an intense but rewarding experience, made easier with support from IPR’s communications team, who provided guidance on framing and messaging. While I don’t routinely do media outreach, I recognize its importance in ensuring that rigorous research informs public understanding and policy debates.
Q. Have you done any community-engaged or participatory work? What was this experience like, and how did it shape your research goals or practices?
In the United States, my work has primarily focused on data analysis, but I previously conducted extensive community-based work in India through the World Bank and other rural-development projects. More recently, I have collaborated with Ohio State’s psychiatry faculty on evaluating first-episode psychosis service centers across Ohio. Visiting these centers and speaking directly with providers gave me a deeper appreciation for how data connects to real-world practice. Those insights continue to inform my research, particularly in understanding how systemic factors and policy design influence care delivery.