NHS productivity measures and the NHS budget
Did research using NHS data under this agreement inform how the NHS budget is set and allocated?
Read this first: The impact is the University of York's own account in its REF 2021 case study. The agreement comes from NHS Digital's archived April–August 2016 release register, which records its purpose and releases as they stood then.
Stage 1: Data access (evidence held)
1 version in NHS England's register.
Stage 2: Research output (evidence held)
1 paper quote the reference; 1 not yet reviewed.
- Hospital Trusts productivity in the English NHS: Uncovering possible drivers of productivity variations. (Paper quotes an agreement reference; identifier matched): “…organisations have appropriate arrangements and safeguards for secure data handling. The HSCIC approved the release of the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) ( content.digital.nhs.uk/hes ) data to the University of York (DARS-NIC-03452-G8Z1V-v1). Hospital Trusts are an administrative unit within th…”
Stage 3: Later trials (not established)
No ClinicalTrials.gov registration found that cites these papers.
Stage 4: Policy and guidance (not established)
No GOV.UK page found whose text cites these papers. Attached PDFs are not searched.
Stage 5: Claimed downstream impact (evidence held)
1 impact claim cite these papers, as the claimants report them; 1 link not yet reviewed.
- Spending Healthcare Resources Wisely (Impact claim cites research; identifier matched): “References to the research: 1. Aragon Aragon MJ, Castelli A, Gaughan J. Hospital Trusts productivity in the English NHS: uncovering possible drivers of productivity variations. *PLoS One* 2017; 12:e0182253. [10.1371/journal.pone.0182253”
Stage 6: Independent corroboration (not established)
No reviewer has confirmed the claimed impact from an independent source.
Stage 7: Measured outcome (not established)
No reviewed evaluation measures an outcome attributable to this data use.
What remains unknown
- The agreement's dates and later versions: the archived register gives neither, and the agreement is not in the current registers.
- Independent corroboration: the case study lists government and NHS documents as corroboration, but none has been read by a reviewer.
- Contribution: other research and advice also fed the decisions the case study describes; their relative weight is not assessed.