Shaw Richard John, Baxter Andrew James, Katikireddi Srinivasa Vittal
MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
BMJ Public Health. 2025 Jun 3;3(1):e001677. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2024-001677. eCollection 2025.
The Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) encourages people in low-income households to stay in education. It was abolished in England but continues in the rest of the UK (RUK). We investigated if the abolition of the EMA was associated with psychological distress using a difference-in-difference design.
The sample of 1328 observations was drawn from Understanding Society participants aged 16/17 at the start of the academic years 2009-2018 and in the bottom income decile. Exposure to the EMA policy regime was identified using an interaction between the UK area (RUK vs England) and EMA policy period. The 2009/2010 academic years indicated the EMA period, 2011 the transition period (when EMA receipt was limited to existing recipients) and 2012-2018 post-EMA. The primary outcome was the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) score ranging 0-36. Other outcomes include the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) and a physical health falsification outcome. Linear regression using robust SEs, adjusting for sex and month of interview, was conducted.
In England, relative to RUK and the EMA period, the transition period (Coef 4.20; 95% CI 1.12 to 7.28) and the post-EMA period (Coef 2.89; 95% CI 0.67 to 5.11) were associated with worse GHQ-12 scores. Results for other mental health outcomes were similar, with no associations with the falsification outcome.
Young people living in low-income households in England appeared to have worse mental health following the removal of the EMA, compared with RUK. However, it is not possible to rule out the potential contribution of cointerventions, such as the raising of mandatory age for education to 17 years in 2013 and 18 years in 2015.
教育维持津贴（EMA）鼓励低收入家庭的人们继续接受教育。该津贴在英格兰已被废除，但在英国其他地区（RUK）仍在继续发放。我们采用差分设计调查了EMA的废除是否与心理困扰有关。
样本包含1328个观测值，取自2009 - 2018学年开始时年龄为16/17岁且处于收入最低十分位数的《理解社会》参与者。使用英国地区（RUK与英格兰）和EMA政策时期之间的交互作用来确定是否受EMA政策制度影响。2009/2010学年表示EMA时期，2011年为过渡期（此时EMA仅发放给现有领取者），2012 - 2018年为后EMA时期。主要结果是一般健康问卷 - 12（GHQ - 12）得分，范围为0 - 36分。其他结果包括12项简短健康调查问卷（SF - 12）和身体健康造假结果。使用稳健标准误进行线性回归，并对性别和访谈月份进行了调整。
在英格兰，相对于RUK和EMA时期，过渡期（系数4.20；95%置信区间1.12至7.28）和后EMA时期（系数2.89；95%置信区间0.67至5.11）与更差的GHQ - 12得分相关。其他心理健康结果的情况类似，与造假结果无关。
与RUK相比，英格兰低收入家庭的年轻人在EMA取消后心理健康状况似乎更差。然而，无法排除共同干预措施的潜在影响，例如2013年将义务教育法定年龄提高到17岁以及2015年提高到18岁。
