What works for whom: a systematic review of inequalities in inclusion and effectiveness of social interventions for mental ill- health

Anna Greenburgh, Helen Baldwin, Hannah Weir, Zara Asif, Dionne Laporte, Mark Bertram, Achille Crawford, Gabrielle Duberry, Shoshana Lauter, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, Cassandra Lovelock, Jayati Das-Munshi and Craig Morgan

LSE Research Online Documents on Economics from London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library

Abstract: Purpose People living with mental ill-health experience social and economic disadvantages, which contribute to poor outcomes and limit effectiveness of treatments. Interventions to improve social and economic circumstances have been developed, however, little is known about whether these interventions are effective for the most marginalised and disadvantaged groups, and those most in need of support. Method We conducted a systematic review in line with a pre-defined protocol to identify interventions to improve the social and economic circumstances of people experiencing mental ill-health. We included relevant records from two previous systematic reviews and updated their searches across four databases. We synthesised the intervention domains and locations of research, participant characteristics, and if effectiveness varied by participant gender, socioeconomic position, and race or ethnicity, and related indicators. We worked in partnership with an advisory board including those with relevant lived experience to conduct this work. Results We identified 266 relevant studies across 34 countries. Certain intervention domains were better researched than others (e.g. housing and employment vs. debt and social security advice). Participant characteristics were poorly reported resulting in a limited understanding of inclusiveness and generalisability of research. Only 8% of papers reported any stratified results and statistical reporting standards were poor, limiting our ability to determine what works for whom. Results from 4 RCTs indicated that interventions are less effective for those in lower socioeconomic groups. Conclusion Improved reporting and representation of marginalised groups, stratified analyses of intervention data, and replication of results is needed to confidently draw conclusions about what works for whom in this field.

Keywords: inequalities; social and economic adversity; social inclusion; social interventions; stratified analyses (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: N0 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 23 pages
Date: 2025-09-22
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 22, September, 2025. ISSN: 0933-7954

Downloads: (external link)
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/129635/ Open access version. (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ehl:lserod:129635

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in LSE Research Online Documents on Economics from London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library LSE Library Portugal Street London, WC2A 2HD, U.K.. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by LSERO Manager ().