Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42577075›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026

Reimagining food security through income security: the potential role of universal basic income in the UK.

Gemma Bridge, Remco Peters, Francis K Poitier, Dave J Beck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Gemma BridgeHealth and Wellbeing Research Centre, London South Bank University, London, United Kingdom.
Remco PetersSchool of Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Francis K PoitierSchool of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Dave J BeckSchool of Health and Society, University of Salford, Salford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food insecurity is increasing across the United Kingdom, driven by rising living costs, welfare retrenchment, and increasingly insecure incomes. Current policy responses largely rely on targeted food assistance and emergency provision, which can mitigate acute hardship but operate downstream of the structural drivers of food insecurity. This article synthesises evidence from food-specific interventions, means-tested benefits, labour-market policies, and unconditional cash transfer programmes to examine whether Universal Basic Income (UBI) could address upstream determinants of food security in high-income contexts. Drawing on international and UK-relevant evidence, we argue that income security is a necessary precondition for effective food and nutrition policy. While UBI cannot resolve structural power imbalances in food systems or replace targeted nutrition interventions, it may reduce financial precarity, improve dietary autonomy, and enhance the effectiveness of existing policies. We conclude that UBI should be understood not as a standalone solution, but as a foundational intervention within integrated food, welfare, and public health strategies.

Indexed as

cash transfersdietary autonomyfinancial precarityfood banksfood insecurityfood securityfood vouchersincome securityuniversal basic income

Identifiers

PMID42577075
PMCPMC13453746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.