Modelling the size, cost and health impacts of universal basic income: What can be done in advance of a trial?

Examining Mental Health and Economic Consequences During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Filipino Residents in Hawai'i: May - Oct 2020

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in rapid and drastic changes to daily lives, posing a threat to residents' mental health and well-being. Filipinos are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 and have one of the highest COVID-19 prevalence in Hawai'i. The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a rise in mental health concerns, yet little is known about the impact on the mental health of Filipinos in Hawai'i. Using publicly available polling data from the SMS Community Pulse Survey, this study sought to describe the mental distress experienced by Filipino residents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected from an online panel of Hawai'i residents over 4 timepoints (May 5-10; June 11-17; July 31-August 8; October 19-31, 2020). Compared to non-Filipinos, a higher proportion of Filipinos reported feeling stress and sadness during 3 of the 4 timepoints. Across all timepoints, Filipinos were more likely to respond affirmatively to mental health indicators (62.5%). Similarly, Filipinos reported food insecurity in higher proportions relative to non-Filipinos in most timepoints, particularly notable in Timepoint 4 where 33.0% of Filipino respondents reported food insecurity. These findings suggest that Filipinos would benefit from social policy and community-supported initiatives to address social determinants of health, reduce chronic stress, and prevent further mental health disparities.

How, why and for whom does a basic income contribute to health and wellbeing: a systematic review

Ensuring that people have a sufficient income to meet their basic needs and that it keeps pace with costs of living are important when considering ways to reduce health inequities. Many have argued that providing a basic income is one way to do this. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the existing peer reviewed evidence on the health and wellbeing impacts of basic income interventions. A systematic search of ten electronic databases was conducted in June 2022. Eligible publications examined any effect on health and wellbeing from unconditional cash transfers. All study designs were included, and no limitations were placed on duration of cash transfer trials, location of study, study population or on amount of money provided through the cash transfer. Ten studies were included in this review. Studies employed a range of methods. All studies reported on a trial of Universal Basic Income in either a region or a town. Studies explored a range of health and wellbeing related outcomes including crime, quality of life, employment, subjective wellbeing, tuberculosis and hospitalization. Basic income programs can mitigate poverty in a time of economic upheaval and have the potential to become a powerful policy tool to act upon the determinants of health and reduce health inequality. This review found a small number of trials indicating a positive impact on health and wellbeing. More trials which track recipients over a longer period are needed to provide more robust evidence for the impact of basic income programs.

Designing a generic, adaptive protocol resource for the measurement of health impact in cash transfer pilot and feasibility studies and trials in high-income countries

INTRODUCTION

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, upstream interventions that tackle social determinants of health inequalities have never been more important. Evaluations of upstream cash transfer trials have failed to capture comprehensively the impacts that such systems might have on population health through inadequate design of the interventions themselves and failure to implement consistent, thorough research measures that can be used in microsimulations to model long-term impact. In this article, we describe the process of developing a generic, adaptive protocol resource to address this issue and the challenges involved in that process. The resource is designed for use in high-income countries (HIC) but draws on examples from a UK context to illustrate means of development and deployment. The resource is capable of further adaptation for use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). It has particular application for trials of Universal Basic Income but can be adapted to those covering other kinds of cash transfer and welfare system changes.

METHODS

We outline two types of prospective intervention based on pilots and trials currently under discussion. In developing the remainder of the resource, we establish six key principles, implement a modular approach based on types of measure and their prospective resource intensity, and source (validated where possible) measures and baseline data primarily from routine collection and large, longitudinal cohort studies. Through these measures, we seek to cover all areas of health impact identified in our theoretical model for use in pilot and feasibility studies.

RESULTS

We find that, in general, self-reported measures alongside routinely collected linked respondent data may provide a feasible means of producing data capable of demonstrating comprehensive health impact. However, we also suggest that, where possible, physiological measures should be included to elucidate underlying biological effects that may not be accurately captured through self-reporting alone and can enable modelling of long-term health outcomes. In addition, accurate self-reported objective income data remains a challenge and requires further development and testing. A process of development and implementation of the resource in pilot and feasibility studies will support assessment of whether or not our proposed health outcome measures are acceptable, feasible and can be used with validity and reliability in the target population.

DISCUSSION

We suggest that while Open Access evaluation instruments are available and usable to measure most constructs of interest, there remain some areas for which further development is necessary. This includes self-reported wellbeing measures that require paid licences but are used in a range of nationally important longitudinal studies instead of Open Access alternatives.