Cited by 240Health disparities and outcomesEmployment and Welfare StudiesMental Health Treatment and Access

Income inequality and mental illness-related morbidity and resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Ribeiro, Wagner Silva, Bauer, Annette, Andrade, Mário César Rezende, York-Smith, Marianna, Pan, Pedro Mario, Pingani, Luca, Knapp, Martin, Coutinho, Evandro Silva Freire +1 more·2017·The Lancet Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Studies of the association between income inequality and mental health have shown mixed results, probably due to methodological heterogeneity. By dealing with such heterogeneity through a systematic review and meta-analysis, we examine the association between income inequality, mental health problems, use of mental health services, and resilience (defined as the ability to cope with adversity).Methods We searched the Global Health, PsychARTICLES, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice, Embase and MEDLINE databases up to July 6, 2016, for quantitative studies of the association of income inequality with prevalence or incidence of mental disorders or mental health problems, use of mental health services, and resilience. Eligible studies used standardised instruments at the individual level, and income inequality at the aggregated, contextual, and ecological level. We extracted study characteristics, sampling, exposure, outcomes, statistical modelling, and parameters from articles. Because several studies did not provide enough statistical information to be included in a meta-analysis, we did a narrative synthesis to summarise results with studies categorised as showing either a positive association, mixed results, or no association. The primary outcome in the random-effects meta-analysis was mental health-related morbidity, defined as the prevalence or incidence of any mental health problem. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016036377.Findings Our search identified 15 615 non-duplicate references, of which 113 were deemed potentially relevant and were assessed for eligibility, leading to the inclusion of 27 studies in the qualitative synthesis. Nine articles found a positive association between income inequality and the prevalence or incidence of mental health problems; ten articles found mixed results, with positive association in some subgroups and non-significant or negative association in other subgroups; and eight articles found no association between income inequality and mental health problems. Of the nine articles included in our meta-analysis, one reported a positive association between income inequality and mental health problems, six reported mixed results, and two reported no association. Pooled Cohen's d effect sizes for the association between income inequality and any mental disorder or mental health problems were 0·06 (95% CI 0·01-0·11) for any mental disorder, and 0·12 (0·05-0·20) for depressive disorders. Our meta-regression analysis showed that none of the factors considered (sample size, contextual level at which income inequality was assessed, quality assessment, type of instruments, and individual income as control variable) explained heterogeneity between studies (I 2 89·3%; p<0·0001). Only one study investigated the association between income inequality and resilience; it found greater income inequality was associated with higher prevalence of depression only among individuals with low income. The only study of the role of income inequality as a determinant of the use of mental health services reported no association.Interpretation Income inequality negatively affects mental health but the effect sizes are small and there is marked heterogeneity among studies. If this association is causal and growing income inequality does lead to an increase in the prevalence of mental health problems, then its reduction could result in a significant improvement in population wellbeing.Funding None.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30159-1

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Anthony BA, François B, eds. Handbook of Income Distribution: Elsevier; 2015: 1419-533.
  2. Fan AZ, Strasser S, Zhang XY, et al. State-level socioeconomic factors are associated with current depression among U.S. adults in 2006 and 2008. Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology 2011; 3(10): 462-70.
  3. Chiavegatto Filho ADP, Kawachi I, Viana MC, Wang YP, Andrade LH. Does income inequality get under the skin? Depression, anxiety and mental disorders in sao paulo, brazil. American Journal of Epidemiology 2013; 177: S153.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ribeiro, W. S., Bauer, A., Andrade, M. C. R., York-Smith, M., Pan, P. M., Pingani, L., Knapp, M., Coutinho, E. S. F., & Evans-Lacko, S.
Affiliations
  • London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
  • Universidade Federal de São Paulo (BR)
  • University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT)
  • Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca (BR)
Corresponding author
Ribeiro, Wagner Silva
Venue
The Lancet Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
4
Issue
7
Pages
554-562
ISSN
2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2618040738
Cited by
240
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 3
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
  • IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • UNIFESP Institutional Repository (Universidade Federal de São Paulo) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
income inequality, mental health, resilience, mental health service utilization, depressive disorders, socioeconomic status, personal income, methodological heterogeneity, coping with adversity, mental health promotion and prevention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Child, Depression, Female, Humans, Income, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Morbidity, Public Policy, Socioeconomic Factors, Incidence, Prevalence, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review