Background: In the context of the UK Government’s ‘prevention agenda’, Laura Webber and colleagues have called for a ‘health in all policies’ approach. Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a system of cash transfers to citizens. Recent research suggests it could significantly benefit population health, including via reducing stress. However, a Finnish trial of a policy with similarities to UBI has influenced debate. This was reported as a failure due to a policy objective of reducing unemployment, despite demonstrating significant benefits to well-being. Aims and objectives: In this piece, we seek to advance the debate about the cost-benefit of UBI by identifying knowledge gaps and proposing a means of designing effective trials. Methods: We review UBI trial design and findings in comparison with social gradient in health literature and biopsychosocial theory to identify knowledge gaps. Findings: We highlight a need to refocus UBI trials on improved health, including via reduced stress, to provide policy makers the means of producing accurate cost-benefit analysis. Previous trials have either not reflected likely UBI policy or failed to measure impacts that enable accurate analysis. We contend that interdisciplinary work is required to establish trials that observe factors known to drive the social health gradient. Finally, we argue that statistical modelling is needed to extrapolate shorter-term findings to long-term population-level outcomes. Discussion and conclusions: Resource allocation by Government and/or major funders is required to produce evidence that enables accurate analysis of UBI. Such trials would provide a platform for interdisciplinary work resulting in joined-up evidence and policy. Key messages Existing Universal Basic Income trial designs have not enabled accurate assessment of the policy Interdisciplinarity is needed in trials to observe key factors driving the social health gradient Statistical modelling is essential to produce population-level evidence for policy development Financial resource must be directed to establishing more thorough and evidence-based trials

中文翻译：

---

衡量全民基本收入作为上游干预措施对健康的影响：捕捉压力减轻的整体试验设计至关重要

背景：在英国政府的“预防议程”背景下，Laura Webber 及其同事呼吁采用“健康融入所有政策”的方法。全民基本收入 (UBI) 是一种向公民提供现金转移的系统。最近的研究表明，它可以显着有益于人口健康，包括通过减轻压力。然而，一项与 UBI 相似的政策的芬兰试验影响了辩论。尽管证明对福祉有显着好处，但由于减少失业的政策目标，这被报告为失败。目的和目标：在这篇文章中，我们试图通过识别知识差距并提出设计有效试验的方法来推进关于 UBI 成本效益的辩论。方法：我们将 UBI 试验设计和结果与健康文献和生物心理社会理论中的社会梯度进行比较，以确定知识差距。结果：我们强调需要将 UBI 试验的重点重新放在改善健康上，包括通过减轻压力，为政策制定者提供进行准确的成本效益分析的手段。之前的试验要么没有反映可能的 UBI 政策，要么未能衡量能够进行准确分析的影响。我们认为需要跨学科工作来建立观察已知驱动社会健康梯度因素的试验。最后，我们认为需要统计建模来将短期结果外推到长期人口水平结果。讨论和结论：需要政府和/或主要资助者分配资源以提供能够准确分析 UBI 的证据。此类试验将为跨学科工作提供平台，从而产生联合证据和政策。关键信息 现有的普遍基本收入试验设计未能准确评估政策 试验中需要跨学科以观察推动社会健康梯度的关键因素 统计建模对于为政策制定提供人口水平的证据至关重要 财政资源必须用于建立更彻底和循证的试验