Suchergebnisse

ObjectivesAdministrative data linkage is relatively under-utilised as a way of generating evidence to guide homelessness policy and service delivery in the UK. Our objective is to contribute insight into the ethical, legal, and practical challenges of using data linkage with data from people experiencing homelessness (PEH).
ApproachWe outline the data collection and linkage methodologies for two UK-based studies related to PEH. The first design aimed to explore the acceptability and feasibility of consented linkage of trial data ('Moving On' trial) to NHS Digital records in a cohort of recruited PEH in two English local authorities (n=50). The second design used administrative data originating from a local authority homelessness service in Wales (n=17,000 cases) to explore educational outcomes of children in homeless households. The resultant data linkage rates are contrasted and discussed in relation to the mechanisms for obtaining and linking personal data.
ResultsThe Moving On trial demonstrated high rates of consent for data linkage and the ability to collect sufficient personal identifiable data to increase the chance of successful matching. Aggregate match rates will be discussed. Of the roughly 17,000 cases included in the local authority administrative data, 75% could be linked to unique individuals using probabilistic matching and were therefor 'useable' in linkage research. The proportion of useable cases rapidly decreased as the cut-off for matching quality was increased, to roughly 50% of cases being useable when a 99% match probability cut-off was used. Matching rates were higher amongst priority need homeless cases, possibly reflecting business need to identify and work closely with these people.
ConclusionWhere homelessness administrative data systems are not designed to enable data linkage, low matching rates can result, reducing study sample sizes and potentially leading to bias towards more extreme cases of homelessness if missed-matches are not random. Consented linkage within large-scale trials offers one possibility for generating long-term evidence.

BackgroundThe use of administrative data in health and social science research continues to expand, with increased availability of data and interest from funders. Researchers, however, continue to experience delays in access, storage and sharing of administrative data. Training opportunities are limited and typically specific to individual data providers or focussed on the analytical aspects of working with administrative data. The CENTRIC study was funded by the Information Commissioners Office, with the aim of developing a broader training curriculum for researchers working with administrative data in the UK.
MethodsA mixed-methods design informed curriculum content, including surveys with researchers, focus group discussions with data providers and workshops with members of the public. Researchers were identified from relevant administrative data networks and invited to participate in an online survey identifying training needs. Data providers were approached with a request to input to a face-to-face or online meeting with two members of the research team about their experiences of working with researchers. Data were analysed within the broad framework of the interview schedule, free text responses in the survey were analysed thematically.
Results107 researchers responded to the online survey and four data providers participated in the focus groups. We identified five main themes, relating to research training needs for UK researchers working with administrative data: communication; timelines; changes & amendments; future-proofing applications; and, the availability of training and support. Data providers either provided additional evidence on these learning needs or ways to address identified challenges. Six modules were developed addressing these training needs. Quotes from the survey and focus groups are used anonymously in the online training modules.
ConclusionThe CENTRIC online training curriculum was launched in September 2020 and is available, free of charge for UK researchers. CENTRIC specifically addresses commonly identified training needs of researchers working with administrative data.

AbstractChildren and young people with care-experience (e.g. foster, kinship and residential care) report poorer mental health and wellbeing than the general population. Despite an emerging evidence-base for intervention, it is not clear if current approaches create, exacerbate or mitigate outcome inequities between different types of participants. We conducted a systematic review of international interventions targeting mental health, subjective wellbeing and suicide-related outcomes amongst care-experienced children and young people aged up to 25 years old. The review included a narrative synthesis of intervention inequities, exploring if they were more or less effective for different participant groups. Eight interventions, with 14 study reports, presented relevant data. Overall, there was no clear evidence that intervention participation could lead to inequitable impacts, being more or less effective for different groups. However, there was some tentative indication that individuals with lower exposure to maltreatment, fewer care placements, and increased baseline mental health problems, might be more responsive to intervention than other participants. There was limited evidence for wellbeing and no data availability for suicide. Future intervention evaluation should focus on assessing if there is potential to create, sustain or exacerbate inequities, and how approaches may be designed to mitigate this risk.