Mental health effects of Universal Credit during COVID-19: a difference-in-differences analysis of UKHLS data

Background Pre-COVID-19 pandemic evidence suggests that the UK’s introduction of Universal Credit (UC) was associated with a deterioration in mental health. Given pandemic-related changes to the benefits system, we sought to evaluate the mental health effects of UC during the pandemic. Methods We used nationally representative individual-level UK Longitudinal Household Panel Study data (2018–2021). We employed a difference-in-differences analysis with individual and time fixed effects comparing UC to legacy claimants (excluding Working Tax Credit claimants). The self-reported General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)-36 served as our main continuous outcome, while the GHQ-12 served as a supplementary caseness measure (≥3). Results Claiming UC during the COVID-19 pandemic reduced psychological distress compared with the comparison group, even after adjusting for confounders (−0.96 (95% CI −1.63 to −0.30)). After adding additional controls the estimates remain similar (−0.86 (95% CI −1.56 to −0.18)). When measured by GHQ-12 caseness, it was also associated with a reduction in the prevalence of psychological distress, but this was less certain due to wide CIs (−0.05 (95% CI −0.10 to 0.00)) and was more uncertain still after adjustment for further confounders (−0.04 (95% CI −0.10 to 0.01)). Event-study models showed that the greatest reduction in psychological distress was experienced during the first treatment year (−0.97 (95% CI −1.77 to −0.17)), without any significant effect 1 year post-treatment (0.12 (95% CI −1.23 to 1.46)). Conclusion Our findings suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the psychological distress of UC claimants was reduced in the short-term compared with a group of legacy claimants—although with some uncertainty across alternative measures. This suggests that the pre-pandemic negative mental health effects of UC may be ameliorated by welfare reforms that aim to increase the generosity and reduce the conditionality of UC.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health
Published
2026-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2026-225938
Primary Topic
Employment and Welfare Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Mental health effects of Universal Credit during COVID-19: a difference-in-differences analysis of UKHLS data

Ben Baumberg Geiger, Marina Eirini Kousta
Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health
Employment and Welfare Studies
article

Mental health effects of Universal Credit during COVID-19: a difference-in-differences analysis of UKHLS data

Ben Baumberg Geiger, Marina Eirini Kousta
article en

Abstract

Background Pre-COVID-19 pandemic evidence suggests that the UK’s introduction of Universal Credit (UC) was associated with a deterioration in mental health. Given pandemic-related changes to the benefits system, we sought to evaluate the mental health effects of UC during the pandemic. Methods We used nationally representative individual-level UK Longitudinal Household Panel Study data (2018–2021). We employed a difference-in-differences analysis with individual and time fixed effects comparing UC to legacy claimants (excluding Working Tax Credit claimants). The self-reported General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)-36 served as our main continuous outcome, while the GHQ-12 served as a supplementary caseness measure (≥3). Results Claiming UC during the COVID-19 pandemic reduced psychological distress compared with the comparison group, even after adjusting for confounders (−0.96 (95% CI −1.63 to −0.30)). After adding additional controls the estimates remain similar (−0.86 (95% CI −1.56 to −0.18)). When measured by GHQ-12 caseness, it was also associated with a reduction in the prevalence of psychological distress, but this was less certain due to wide CIs (−0.05 (95% CI −0.10 to 0.00)) and was more uncertain still after adjustment for further confounders (−0.04 (95% CI −0.10 to 0.01)). Event-study models showed that the greatest reduction in psychological distress was experienced during the first treatment year (−0.97 (95% CI −1.77 to −0.17)), without any significant effect 1 year post-treatment (0.12 (95% CI −1.23 to 1.46)). Conclusion Our findings suggest that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the psychological distress of UC claimants was reduced in the short-term compared with a group of legacy claimants—although with some uncertainty across alternative measures. This suggests that the pre-pandemic negative mental health effects of UC may be ameliorated by welfare reforms that aim to increase the generosity and reduce the conditionality of UC.

Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health
King's College London (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Employment and Welfare Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Mental health effects of Universal Credit during COVID-19: a difference-in-differences analysis of UKHLS data — Ben Baumberg Geiger, Marina Eirini Kousta · Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS