Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42806341›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2026

Research governance in England needs improvements to ensure participant and site confidentiality in healthcare workforce research.

Justin Aunger, Jane Ferguson, Esra Alkim Karaagac, Tommer Spence, Jill Maben, Ashok Patnaik, Russell Mannion, Yingxi Zhao, Nathan Proudlove, Helen Bodenham-Chilton and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Justin AungerNIHR Midlands Patient Safety Research Collaboration, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. J.Aunger@bham.ac.uk.
Jane FergusonHealth Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Esra Alkim KaraagacHealth Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Tommer SpenceHealth Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Jill MabenSchool of Health Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
Ashok PatnaikDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Russell MannionHealth Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Yingxi ZhaoNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Nathan ProudloveAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Helen Bodenham-ChiltonHealth Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Kieran WalsheAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research Midlands Patient Safety Research Collaboration.National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR163519National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR306576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensitive healthcare workforce research relies on credible assurances of confidentiality for participating staff and organizations. Yet, National Health Service (NHS) research governance processes can compromise these assurances even before recruitment begins, particularly through processes such as site documentation, local principal investigator (PI) requirements, research passports, and portfolio reporting. These risks are especially important for studies examining organizationally sensitive topics such as bullying, speaking up, or patient safety issues, where perceived employer awareness may reduce participation or encourage self-censorship. From March 2026, the Health Research Authority introduced reforms for staff-only studies, including streamlined site set-up, reduced site visibility, and fewer requirements for local PIs or research passports in remote studies. However, further changes are needed to better balance transparency, oversight and confidentiality. Potential improvements include dedicated pathways for sensitive organizational research, restricted-access portfolio reporting, and more centralized governance documentation. Future changes should be co-designed with researchers and NHS research and development departments to protect confidentiality and improve research productivity, while maintaining ethical standards and accountability.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityHealth Services ResearchHealth WorkforceResearch PersonnelEnglandHumansState MedicineAnonymityBureaucracyConfidentialityGovernanceHealthcareResearch governanceStaffWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID42806341
PMCPMC13617882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.