Thomson, Rachel M., Kopasker, Daniel, Bronka, Patryk, Richiardi, Matteo, Khodygo, Vladimir, Baxter, Andrew J., Igelström, Erik, Pearce, Anna, Leyland, Alastair H., and Katikireddi, S. Vittal
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. Rachel M Thomson and colleagues used a policy model to simulate how a Universal Basic Income might influence mental health for working-age adults in the UK. Author summary: Why was this study done?: Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a radical social security policy proposal where everyone in a society would receive a regular, unconditional cash payment. It has been suggested that UBI might be beneficial for mental health. However, there has never been a trial of a true UBI in a high-income country to know what its potential mental health impacts might be. What did the researchers do and find?: We used a policy model to simulate how a UBI might influence mental health for working-age adults in the United Kingdom. We found that the effects of UBI were very sensitive to assumptions we made about how people's employment choices might respond to receiving the money—if people choose to stay in work, UBI may have small benefits for population mental health, but if people are more likely to leave work, population mental health may actually worsen. The groups most likely to experience positive mental health effects of UBI were women and those with the lowest educational qualifications. What do these findings mean?: UBI may have potential to improve population mental health in high-income countries, but only if people do not choose to leave work in response to the policy. More real-world research is needed to know how people are likely to respond to receiving a UBI in reality. The main limitation of our modelling study is that it looks at how UBI would influence mental health only through income and employment, and other pathways might also be important to include in future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]