Woskie

Liana R. Woskie

Assistant Professor of Community Health, Tufts University
Chapter Member: Boston SSN
Areas of Expertise:

Connect with Liana

About Liana

Woskie’s research focuses on reproductive policy and health economics, including health system performance, drivers of coercive female sterilization, violence against women, and broader comparative health policy. Overarching themes include accountability in health systems, reproductive injustice, structural violence in care, and the use of causal inference methods to evaluate health policies. Woskie holds a PhD in health economics from the London School of Economics and serves in academic and civic roles, where she has contributed to projects on community health worker integration, assessing iatrogenic harm, and understanding human rights violations during acute crises, such as pandemics.

In the News

Research discussed by Genevieve Rajewski, in "When Pregnancy Emergencies Collide With State Abortion Bans," TuftsNow, December 5, 2025.
Quoted by Sushmita Pathak, Lauren Frayer, and Marc Silver in "India's Pandemic Death Toll Estimated At About 4 Million: 10 Times The Official Count," NPR, July 20, 2021.
Research discussed by Siddhartha Mukherjee, in "Can Doctors Choose Between Saving Lives and Saving a Fortune?," The New York Times Magazine, April 3, 2018.

Publications

"Obstetric-Related Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act Violations and No Health Exception Bans" (with Nora Brower, Jonathan Shaffer, and Keren Ladin). JAMA Health Forum 6, no. 12 (2025).

Examines whether states with abortion bans that lack exceptions for a pregnant patient’s health experienced changes in violations of the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires hospitals to provide emergency medical care. Finds that states with these restrictive abortion laws experience significant increases in obstetric-related EMTALA violations, suggesting that such laws may create confusion or barriers that interfere with federally protected emergency care for pregnant patients.

"Contemporary Human Rights Violations in Female Sterilization Care: Legal and Ethical Considerations When Coerced Patients Do Consent" (with Mindy Jane Roseman). Monash Bioethics Review 43, no. 2 (2025): 268-288.

Explores the legal and ethical challenges raised by female sterilization procedures performed under coercive conditions, particularly when patients appear to provide consent. Argues that consent obtained in contexts of pressure, discrimination, or unequal power does not adequately protect patients' human rights and that such practices can constitute serious human rights violations.

"Patient Satisfaction and Value Based Purchasing in Hospitals, Odisha, India" (with Anuska Kalita, Bijetri Bose, Arpita Chakraborty, Kirti Gupta, and Winnie Yip). Bull World Health Organ 102, no. 7 (2024): 509–520.

Examines whether patient satisfaction surveys accurately reflect hospital performance and patient experiences in public hospitals in Odisha, India. Demonstrates that measures based only on patient satisfaction can overlook disrespectful or poor-quality care, particularly among socially marginalized patients, because patients may report being satisfied despite negative experiences.

"Do Men and Women “Lockdown” Differently? Examining Panama’s Covid-19 Sex-Segregated Social Distancing Policy" (with Clare Wenham). Feminist Economics 27 (2021): 327–344.

Examines how Panama’s sex-segregated COVID-19 lockdown policy affected the daily mobility and public participation of men and women. Finds that the policy produced unequal effects, with women experiencing greater restrictions on movement and access to public spaces, highlighting the gendered consequences of pandemic control measures.

"Rethinking Assumptions About Delivery of Healthcare: Implications for Universal Health Coverage" (with Jishnu Das, Ruma Rajbhandari, Kamran Abbasi, and Ashish Jha). BMJ 361 (2018).

Evaluates whether increasing access to healthcare services is enough to achieve universal health coverage and improve population health. Argues that access alone is insufficient, demonstrating that poor-quality care can limit health gains even when services are available and that improving the quality of care is essential to achieving universal health coverage.