ArticleBMJ innovations2026
Using a peer-led network to overcome the barriers to innovation in the NHS: the case of the NHS InSites Programme.
Article in BMJ innovations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The adoption and spread of innovation remain persistent challenges for the English National Health Service (NHS). Traditional top-down approaches provide authority but often fail to account for local context, while bottom-up approaches harness frontline knowledge but fail to overcome systemic inertia. The NHS InSites Programme offers a distinctive alternative that seeks to transcend this dichotomy by combining peer-led learning networks with centralised coordination. We aim to explore the factors that support or hinder the adoption and spread of innovation in the context of the NHS InSites Programme. Method: This qualitative study draws on 25 semistructured interviews with 33 participants, including NHS staff, InSites Hub members and NHS England commissioners. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify key barriers and facilitators to innovation adoption and spread. Findings: Participants generally expressed positive attitudes towards the NHS InSites Programme, viewing it as a valuable catalyst for collaboration, learning and structured innovation support, bridging the limitations of top-down and bottom-up approaches to innovation spread. Four overarching themes influencing innovation adoption were identified: ringfenced financial support; transcending hierarchical structures; harmonising processes to navigate fragmentation and challenging context. Our analysis also showed that the programme's effectiveness relies on relational trust to enhance learning; harmonised processes to allow adaptation and institutional support to transcend hierarchical structures. Conclusion: By providing dedicated resources, harmonising processes and enabling peer-to-peer learning, the NHS InSites Programme addresses several well-documented barriers to spreading innovation. Its long-term contribution will depend on sustained investment, continued policy support and the ability to scale its mechanisms beyond early adopter sites.
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.