Short-term impacts of Universal Basic Income on population mental health inequalities in the UK: A microsimulation modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Population mental health in the United Kingdom (UK) has deteriorated, alongside worsening socioeconomic conditions, over the last decade. Policies such as Universal Basic Income (UBI) have been suggested as an alternative economic approach to improve population mental health and reduce health inequalities. UBI may improve mental health (MH), but to our knowledge, no studies have trialled or modelled UBI in whole populations. We aimed to estimate the short-term effects of introducing UBI on mental health in the UK working-age population. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Adults aged 25 to 64 years were simulated across a 4-year period from 2022 to 2026 with the SimPaths microsimulation model, which models the effects of UK tax/benefit policies on mental health via income, poverty, and employment transitions. Data from the nationally representative UK Household Longitudinal Study were used to generate the simulated population (n = 25,000) and causal effect estimates. Three counterfactual UBI scenarios were modelled from 2023: "Partial" (value equivalent to existing benefits), "Full" (equivalent to the UK Minimum Income Standard), and "Full+" (retaining means-tested benefits for disability, housing, and childcare). Likely common mental disorder (CMD) was measured using the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12, score ≥4). Relative and slope indices of inequality were calculated, and outcomes stratified by gender, age, education, and household structure. Simulations were run 1,000 times to generate 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). Sensitivity analyses relaxed SimPaths assumptions about reduced employment resulting from Full/Full+ UBI. Partial UBI had little impact on poverty, employment, or mental health. Full UBI scenarios practically eradicated poverty but decreased employment (for Full+ from 78.9% [95% UI 77.9, 79.9] to 74.1% [95% UI 72.6, 75.4]). Full+ UBI increased absolute CMD prevalence by 0.38% (percentage points; 95% UI 0.13, 0.69) in 2023, equivalent to 157,951 additional CMD cases (95% UI 54,036, 286,805); effects were largest for men (0.63% [95% UI 0.31, 1.01]) and those with children (0.64% [95% UI 0.18, 1.14]). In our sensitivity analysis assuming minimal UBI-related employment impacts, CMD prevalence instead fell by 0.27% (95% UI -0.49, -0.05), a reduction of 112,228 cases (95% UI 20,783, 203,673); effects were largest for women (-0.32% [95% UI -0.65, 0.00]), those without children (-0.40% [95% UI -0.68, -0.15]), and those with least education (-0.42% [95% UI -0.97, 0.15]). There was no effect on educational mental health inequalities in any scenario, and effects waned by 2026. The main limitations of our methods are the model's short time horizon and focus on pathways from UBI to mental health solely via income, poverty, and employment, as well as the inability to integrate macroeconomic consequences of UBI; future iterations of the model will address these limitations. CONCLUSIONS: UBI has potential to improve short-term population mental health by reducing poverty, particularly for women, but impacts are highly dependent on whether individuals choose to remain in employment following its introduction. Future research modelling additional causal pathways between UBI and mental health would be beneficial.

Sexual and reproductive health in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional population survey (Natsal-COVID-Wave 2) and national surveillance data.

OBJECTIVES: To assess sexual behaviour, and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes, after 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. METHODS: 6658 participants aged 18-59 and resident in Britain completed a cross-sectional web-panel survey (Natsal-COVID-Wave 2, March-April 2021), 1 year after the first lockdown. Natsal-COVID-2 follows the Natsal-COVID-Wave 1 survey (July-August 2020) which captured impacts in the initial months. Quota-based sampling and weighting resulted in a quasi-representative population sample. Data were contextualised with reference to the most recent probability sample population data (Natsal-3; collected 2010-12; 15 162 participants aged 16-74) and national surveillance data on recorded sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, conceptions, and abortions in England/Wales (2010-2020). The main outcomes were: sexual behaviour; SRH service use; pregnancy, abortion and fertility management; sexual dissatisfaction, distress and difficulties. RESULTS: In the year from the first lockdown, over two-thirds of participants reported one or more sexual partners (women 71.8%; men 69.9%), while fewer than 20.0% reported a new partner (women 10.4%; men 16.8%). Median occasions of sex per month was two. Compared with 2010-12 (Natsal-3), we found less sexual risk behaviour (lower reporting of multiple partners, new partners, and new condomless partners), including among younger participants and those reporting same-sex behaviour. One in 10 women reported a pregnancy; pregnancies were fewer than in 2010-12 and less likely to be scored as unplanned. 19.3% of women and 22.8% of men were distressed or worried about their sex life, significantly more than in 2010-12. Compared with surveillance trends from 2010 to 2019, we found lower than expected use of STI-related services and HIV testing, lower levels of chlamydia testing, and fewer conceptions and abortions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with significant changes in sexual behaviour, SRH, and service uptake in the year following the first lockdown in Britain. These data are foundational to SRH recovery and policy planning.

Contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

BACKGROUND: Contraceptive services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Natsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6658 adults aged 18-59 years between March and April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18-44 years, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use, contraceptive switching due to the pandemic, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness. RESULTS: Of 1488 participants, 1619 were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, of whom 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. Among all participants, 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. 29.3% (26.9%-31.8%) of at-risk participants reported seeking contraceptive services, of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported difficulty accessing services. Clinic closures and cancelled appointments were commonly reported pandemic-related reasons for difficulty accessing services. This unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) scored as 'unplanned'; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment. CONCLUSIONS: Just under a third of participants sought contraceptive services during the pandemic and most were successful, indicating resilience and adaptability of service delivery. However, one in six reported an unmet need due to the pandemic. COVID-induced inequalities in service access potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.

Exploring the health and sociodemographic characteristics of people seeking advice with claiming universal credit: a cross-sectional analysis of UK citizens advice data, 2017-2021.

BACKGROUND: The UK Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) administers Universal Credit (UC) - the main UK benefit for people in- and out-of-work. UC is being rolled out nationally from 2013 to 2024. Citizens Advice (CA) is an independent charity that provides advice and support to people making a claim for UC. The aim of this study is to understand who is seeking advice from CA when making a UC claim and how the types of people seeking advice are changing as the rollout of UC continues. METHODS: Co-developed with Citizens Advice Newcastle and Citizens Advice Northumberland we performed longitudinal analysis of national data from Citizens Advice for England and Wales on the health (mental health and limiting long term conditions) and socio-demographic of 1,003,411 observations for people seeking advice with claiming UC over four financial years (2017/18 to 2020/21). We summarised population characteristics and estimated the differences between the four financial years using population-weighted t-tests. Findings were discussed with three people with lived experience of seeking advice to claim UC to help frame our interpretation and policy recommendations. RESULTS: When comparing 2017/18 to 2018/19, there was a significantly higher proportion of people with limiting long term conditions seeking advice with claiming UC than those without (+ 2.40%, 95%CI: 1.31-3.50%). However, as the rollout continued between 2018/29 and 2019/20 (-6.75%, 95%CI: -9.62%--3.88%) and between 2019/20 and 2020/21 (-2.09%, 95%CI: -2.54%--1.64%), there were significantly higher proportions of those without a limiting long term condition seeking advice than with. When comparing 2018/19 to 2019/20 and 2019/20 to 2020/21, there was a significant increase in the proportion of self-employed compared to unemployed people seeking advice with claiming UC (5.64%, 95%CI: 3.79-7.49%) and (2.26%, 95%CI: 1.29-3.23%) respectively. CONCLUSION: As the rollout for UC continues, it is important to understand how changes in eligibility for UC may impact on those who need help with applying for UC. Ensuring that the advice process and application process is responsive to a range of people with different needs can help to reduce the likelihood that the process of claiming UC will exacerbate health inequalities.

Evaluation of the mental health impacts of Universal Credit: protocol for a mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: The UK social security system is being transformed by the implementation of Universal Credit (UC), which combines six existing benefits and tax credits into a single payment for low-income households. Despite extensive reports of hardship associated with the introduction of UC, no previous studies have comprehensively evaluated its impact on mental health. Because payments are targeted at low-income households, impacts on mental health will have important consequences for health inequalities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a mixed methods study. Work package (WP) 1 will compare health outcomes for new recipients of UC with outcomes for legacy benefit recipients in two large population surveys, using the phased rollout of UC as a natural experiment. We will also analyse the relationship between the proportion of UC claimants in small areas and a composite measure of mental health. WP2 will use data collected by Citizen's Advice to explore the sociodemographic and health characteristics of people who seek advice when claiming UC and identify features of the claim process that prompt advice-seeking. WP3 will conduct longitudinal in-depth interviews with up to 80 UC claimants in England and Scotland to explore reasons for claiming and experiences of the claim process. Up to 30 staff supporting claimants will also be interviewed. WP4 will use a dynamic microsimulation model to simulate the long-term health impacts of different implementation scenarios. WP5 will undertake cost-consequence analysis of the potential costs and outcomes of introducing UC and cost-benefit analyses of mitigating actions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We obtained ethical approval for the primary data gathering from the University of Glasgow, College of Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee, application number 400200244. We will use our networks to actively disseminate findings to UC claimants, the public, practitioners and policy-makers, using a range of methods and formats. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study is registered with the Research Registry: researchregistry6697.

Examining the sources of evidence in e-cigarette policy recommendations: A citation network analysis of international public health recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Public health policies and recommendations aim to be informed by the best available evidence. Evidence underpinning e-cigarettes policy recommendations has been necessarily limited due to the novelty of the technology and the lack of long-term epidemiological studies and trials. Some public health bodies have actively encouraged e-cigarette use whilst others have raised concerns over introducing new health risks and renormalising tobacco smoking. Using citation network analysis we investigated the author conflicts of interest and study funding statements within sources of evidence used by public health bodies when making recommendations about e-cigarette policy. METHODS: We conducted citation network analysis of public health recommendation documents across four purposively selected diverse jurisdictions: WHO, UK, Australia, and USA. We extracted all citations from 15 public health recommendation documents, with more detailed data collected for influential citations (used in 3+ recommendation documents). We analysed the relationships between the sources of evidence used across jurisdictions using block modelling to determine if similar groups of documents were used across different jurisdictions. We assessed the frequency and nature of conflicts of interest. RESULTS: 1700 unique citations were included across the 15 public health recommendation documents, with zero to 923 citations per document (median = 63, IQR = 7.5-132). The evidence base underpinning public health recommendations did not systematically differ across jurisdictions. Of the 1700 citations included, the majority were journal articles (n = 1179). Across 1081 journal articles published between 1998-2018, 200 declared a conflict of interest, 288 contained no mention of conflicts of interest, and 593 declared none. Conflicts of interest were reported with tobacco (3%; n = 37 journal articles of 1081), e-cigarette (7%; n = 72), and pharmaceutical companies (12%; n = 127), with such conflicts present even in the most recent years. There were 53 influential citations, the most common study type was basic science research without human subjects (e.g. examination of aerosols and e-liquids) (n = 18) followed by systematic review (n = 10); with randomised control trial being least common (n = 4). Network analysis identified clusters of highly-cited articles with a higher prevalence of conflicts of interest. CONCLUSION: Public health bodies across different jurisdictions drew upon similar sources of evidence, despite articulating different policy approaches to e-cigarettes. The evidence drawn upon, including the most influential evidence, contained substantial conflicts of interest (including relationships with e-cigarette and tobacco industries). Processes to explicitly manage conflicts of interest arising from the underlying evidence base may be required when developing public health recommendations.

How effective was England's teenage pregnancy strategy? A comparative analysis of high-income countries.

Teenage pregnancy is associated with numerous health risks, both to mothers and infants, and may contribute to entrenched social inequalities. In countries with high rates of teenage pregnancy there is disagreement on effective action to reduce rates. England's Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, which cost £280 million over its ten year implementation period, has been highlighted as an effective way of reducing pregnancies after rates fell by more than 50% from 1998 to 2014 and widely advocated as a replicable model for other countries. However, it is not clear whether the fall is attributable to the strategy or to background trends and other events. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy on pregnancy and birth rates using comparators. We compared under-18 pregnancy rates in England with Scotland and Wales using interrupted time series methods. We compared under-18 birth rates and under-20 pregnancy rates in England with European and English-speaking high-income countries using synthetic control methods. In the controlled interrupted time series analyses, trends in rates of teenage pregnancy in England closely followed those in Scotland (0.08 fewer pregnancies per 1000 women per year in England; -0.74 to 0.59) and Wales (0.14 more pregnancies per 1000 women per year in England; -0.48 to 0.76). In synthetic control analyses, under-18 birth rates were very similar in England and the synthetic control. Under-20 pregnancy rates were marginally higher in England than control. Although teenage pregnancies and births in England fell following implementation of the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, comparisons with other countries suggest the strategy had little, if any, effect on pregnancy rates. This raises doubts about whether the strategy should be used as a model for future public health interventions in countries aiming to reduce teenage pregnancy.

Effects of Housing First approaches on health and well-being of adults who are homeless or at risk of homelessness: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Homelessness is associated with poor health. A policy approach aiming to end homelessness across Europe and North America, the 'Housing First' (HF) model, provides rapid housing, not conditional on abstinence from substance use. We aimed to systematically review the evidence from randomised controlled trials for the effects of HF on health and well-being. METHODS: We searched seven databases for randomised controlled trials of interventions providing rapid access to non-abstinence-contingent, permanent housing. We extracted data on the following outcomes: mental health; self-reported health and quality of life; substance use; non-routine use of healthcare services; housing stability. We assessed risk of bias and calculated standardised effect sizes. RESULTS: We included four studies, all with 'high' risk of bias. The impact of HF on most short-term health outcomes was imprecisely estimated, with varying effect directions. No clear difference in substance use was seen. Intervention groups experienced fewer emergency department visits (incidence rate ratio (IRR)=0.63; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.82), fewer hospitalisations (IRR=0.76; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.83) and less time spent hospitalised (standardised mean difference (SMD)=-0.14; 95% CI -0.41 to 0.14) than control groups. In all studies intervention participants spent more days housed (SMD=1.24; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.62) and were more likely to be housed at 18-24 months (risk ratio=2.46; 95% CI 1.58 to 3.84). CONCLUSION: HF approaches successfully improve housing stability and may improve some aspects of health. Implementation of HF would likely reduce homelessness and non-routine health service use without an increase in problematic substance use. Impacts on long-term health outcomes require further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017064457.