Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41772187›Full record

ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026

Large-scale system-level digitalisation initiatives in the National Health Service in England: insights from three national evaluations.

Kathrin Cresswell, Robin Williams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

2 authors.

Kathrin CresswellProfessor of Digital Innovations in Health and Care, Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. Kathrin.Cresswell@ed.ac.uk.
Robin WilliamsProfessor of Social Research on Technology, Institute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a growing number of large-scale digitalisation programmes in health and care, each aiming to coordinate digital technologies across systems and organisations. This paper draws on findings from three independent evaluations of national initiatives within the English National Health Service, examining implementation, reception, and lessons for future efforts. We evaluated three national programmes collectively valued at £13 billion. We conducted 1079 interviews with implementers, frontline staff, patients, decision-makers, and vendors. We also observed 819 clinical encounters and meetings, and reviewed 2219 documents, including plans, minutes, business cases, and lessons-learned reports. Data gathered over 15 years enabled detailed analysis of temporal and contextual variation. Although programme goals differed, common themes emerged. Integrating new technologies with existing legacy systems constrained progress and demanded long-term systemic change, particularly in larger programmes involving multiple technological systems. The most significant challenges were sociotechnical. Expectations were inflated, timelines politically driven, and governance unstable, with objectives drifting over time. Conflicting priorities undermined coordination, and valuable learning was not consistently retained. National support and system-level coordination are essential for large-scale digital transformation. We propose a three-stage model: invest in infrastructure, enable shared learning, and build on these foundations to drive advanced innovation.

Identifiers

PMID41772187
PMCPMC13066607

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.