ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2026
Seven lessons for financial incentivisation schemes in healthcare: a qualitative study of NHS Resolution's Maternity Incentive Scheme.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAvoidable harm and variations in quality have remained persistent features of health systems, but the track record of financial incentives in driving improvement is mixed. Based on an evaluation of NHS Resolution's Maternity Incentive Scheme (MIS), which focuses on safety of maternity care in English NHS trusts, we identify generalisable principles to inform design of financial incentive schemes in healthcare.
designQualitative process evaluation based on interviews with those involved in the design and delivery of MIS.
settingOrganisations involved in running MIS and organisations participating in the scheme.
participantsThirty-five individuals were interviewed, including 17 involved in the national-level administration of MIS and 18 with experience of MIS at local level.
main outcome measuresNot applicable.
resultsWe identified strengths, weaknesses and unintended consequences of the Scheme from the perspective of participants. MIS was seen by national-level stakeholders as having succeeded in elevating maternity safety in organisations' priorities and consolidating disparate safety requirements into a unified framework. They saw MIS as a clinically credible and system-owned mechanism for prioritisation. However, local-level participants reported significant administrative burdens, opportunity costs and challenges in interpreting and implementing its requirements. The Scheme's all-or-nothing reimbursement model, while reinforcing parity across the areas it covered, sometimes led to disproportionate focus on marginal issues and created perverse incentives when full compliance seemed unattainable. We identify seven key lessons for the design of incentive systems that might optimise their impact from the findings.
conclusionsCareful design of incentive schemes is vital to minimise unintended consequences. Lessons from MIS are relevant to broader healthcare system reform efforts and initiatives aiming to harness financial levers for quality improvement, such as those in the 10-Year Health Plan for England.
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.