ArticleBMJ open2024
Trends and determinants of clinical staff retention in the English NHS: a double retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intentions and actions towards leaving healthcare work since COVID-19: group-based trajectory analyses in the UK-REACH cohort.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2026Article
- Global insights on diversity, equity, and inclusion-perspectives and experiences from musculoskeletal radiologists of the International Skeletal Society DEI Committee.Skeletal radiology · 2025Review
- AmReS: an observational retrospective time-to-event analysis of staff voluntary turnover in an English ambulance trust.BMJ open · 2025Observational
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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate how demographic, contractual and organisational factors are related to the retention of hospital workers in the English NHS. The study will specifically examine the trends in age-retention profiles.
designA double retrospective cross-cohort study using administrative data on senior and specialty doctors, nurses and midwives who were included in the 2009 and 2014 payrolls of all English NHS hospital Trusts. These individuals were tracked over time until 2019 to examine the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and the retention of hospital workers in each cohort. Logistic regressions were estimated at the individual worker level to analyse the data. Additionally, a multilevel panel regression was performed using linked payroll-survey data to investigate the association between hospital organisation characteristics and the retention of clinical staff.
settingSecondary acute and mental healthcare NHS hospital Trusts in England.
participants70 777 senior doctors (specialty and specialist doctors and hospital consultants) aged 30-70, and a total of 448 568 between nurses and midwives of any grade aged 20-70, employed by English NHS Trusts. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Employee retention, measured through binary indicators for stayers and NHS leavers, at 1-year and 5-year horizons.
resultsMinority doctors had lower 1-year retention rates in acute care than white doctors, while minority nurses and midwives saw higher retention. Part-time roles decreased retention for doctors but improved it for nurses. Fixed-term contracts negatively impacted both groups' retention. Trends diverged for nurses and doctors from 2009 to 2014-nurses' retention declined while doctors' 5-year retention slightly rose. Engagement boosted retention among clinical staff under 51 years of age in acute care. For nurses over 50, addressing their feedback was positively associated with retention.
conclusionsDemographic and contractual factors appear to be stronger predictors of hospital staff retention than organisational characteristics.
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.