ArticleBMJ open2016
Complexity in the new NHS: longitudinal case studies of CCGs in England.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of new forms of large-scale general practice provider collaborations on England's NHS: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Pooled it
- A multifaceted intervention to reduce antibiotic prescribing among CHIldren with acute COugh and respiratory tract infection: the CHICO cluster RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Trial
- Article
- Article
- Value, challenges and practical considerations when designing, conducting and analysing a longitudinal qualitative study in family medicine.Family medicine and community health · 2021Article
- [Financing of integrated health service networks].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2020Article
- Is partnership the answer? Delivering the national immunisation programme in the new English health system: a mixed methods study.BMC public health · 2019Article
- GP leadership in clinical commissioning groups: a qualitative multi-case study approach across England.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Article
- Accountability in the NHS: the impact on cancer care.Ecancermedicalscience · 2018Article
- Engaging GPs in commissioning: realist evaluation of the early experiences of Clinical Commissioning Groups in the English NHS.Journal of health services research & policy · 2017Article
- Aquatic therapy for boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD): an external pilot randomised controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2017Article
- "It's a complex mesh"- how large-scale health system reorganisation affected the delivery of the immunisation programme in England: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe reform in the English National Health Services (NHS) under the Health and Social Care Act 2012 is unlike previous NHS reorganisations. The establishment of clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) was intended to be 'bottom up' with no central blueprint. This paper sets out to offer evidence about how this process has played out in practice and examines the implications of the complexity and variation which emerged.
designDetailed case studies in CCGs across England, using interviews, observation and documentary analysis. Using realist framework, we unpacked the complexity of CCG structures. SETTING/
participantsIn phase 1 of the study (January 2011 to September 2012), we conducted 96 interviews, 439 h of observation in a wide variety of meetings, 2 online surveys and 38 follow-up telephone interviews. In phase 2 (April 2013 to March 2015), we conducted 42 interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and managers and observation of 48 different types of meetings.
resultsOur study has highlighted the complexity inherent in CCGs, arising out of the relatively permissive environment in which they developed. Not only are they very different from one another in size, but also in structure, functions between different bodies and the roles played by GPs.
conclusionsThe complexity and lack of uniformity of CCGs is important as it makes it difficult for those who must engage with CCGs to know who to approach at what level. This is of increasing importance as CCGs are moving towards greater integration across health and social care. Our study also suggests that there is little consensus as to what being a 'membership' organisation means and how it should operate. The lack of uniformity in CCG structure and lack of clarity over the meaning of 'membership' raises questions over accountability, which becomes of greater importance as CCG is taking over responsibility for primary care co-commissioning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.