Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835
Books209
All textbooksMedical textbooksHuman anatomyOrganisms & biodiversityOther sciences
Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Evaluating the real-world implementation of the Family Nurse Partnership in England: a data linkage study›Additional information

Continue where you left off ()

GO BEYOND THE PAGEReading is just the beginning.

Turn scientific reading into research. Compare studies, examine evidence, and organize your findings in EvidenceHelix Workspace.

Explore Research Workspace →

Evaluating the real-world implementation of the Family Nurse Partnership in England: a data linkage study · Additional information

Additional information

CC BY 4.0 · National Institute for Health and Care Research · approximately 5 min read

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank members of our Advisory Group from the Building Blocks trial team (Mike Robling, Rebecca Cannings-John and Fiona Lugg-Widger) for their advice on the design and interpretation of this study. MR, RCJ and FLW contributed to the discussion of potential biases relating to the study. We would also like to thank Linda Wijlaars for her help requesting and extracting the data and Emma Howarth for her input to the protocol.

We would like to thank members of our Study Steering Committee (Jane Barlow, Lorna Fraser, Emily Petherick, Marni Brownell, Loretta McGurry and Romy Labrosse) for their helpful input, advice and suggestions throughout the course of the study.

The authors would also like to thank the FNP National Unit for their help in establishing the linked dataset and interpreting the results, including Lynne Reed, Alisa Swarbrick, Andreea Calin, Sarah Tyndall and Alex Stevenson. We would also like to thank the FNP nurses and clinical leads who provided valuable insight into the results and the discussion, including Cheryl Beirne, Alison Goodall, Amanda Malthouse, Nicole Hobson and Christine Anderson. We would also like to thank Cheryll Adams and Alison Morton from the Institute of Health Visiting for their input.

We would like to thank Sue Hillsden from the FNP National Unit for her help identifying catchment areas and activity dates for FNP sites. We thank Nicole Hobson from the FNP National Unit, as well as Debbie Bougard, Karen Arkle, Caroline Scott, Mel Green, Lydia Ottavio, Catherine Dent, Charde Thompson, Anna Parry and Kristin Vreugdenhil from FNP teams, for their help with understanding referral processes and sharing aggregate enrolment data from their sites.

We would like to thank Jenny Woodman, Matt Jay, Anne McKay and Pip O’Byrne for their extremely valuable contributions to our interpretation of results and discussion within the report. We would also like to thank the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health Statistics Group for their helpful advice on developing the propensity score matching approach.

Contributions of authors

Francesca Cavallaro (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9641-8780) did the analysis and contributed to writing the report.

Amanda Clery (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7366-9982) did the analysis and contributed to writing the report.

Ruth Gilbert (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9347-2709) contributed to the design of the study, interpretation of results and to writing the report.

Jan van der Meulen (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9451-2335) contributed to the design of the study, interpretation of results and to writing the report.

Sally Kendall (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2507-0350) contributed to the design of the study and interpretation of results.

Eilis Kennedy (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4162-4974) contributed to the design of the study and interpretation of results.

Catherine Phillips (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9964-3684) conducted the qualitative interviews.

Katie Harron (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3418-2856) did the analysis, designed the study and wrote the report.

Disclosure of interests

Full disclosure of interests: Completed ICMJE forms for all authors, including all related interests, are available in the toolkit on the NIHR Journals Library report publication page at https://doi.org/10.3310/BVDW6447.

Primary conflicts of interest: No competing interests.

Patient data

This work uses data provided by patients and collected by the NHS as part of their care and support. Using patient data is vital to improve health and care for everyone. There is huge potential to make better use of information from people’s patient records, to understand more about disease, develop new treatments, monitor safety and plan NHS services. Patient data should be kept safe and secure to protect everyone’s privacy, and it is important that there are safeguards to make sure that they are stored and used responsibly. Everyone should be able to find out about how patient data are used. #datasaveslives You can find out more about the background to this citation here: https://understandingpatientdata.org.uk/data-citation.

Data-sharing statement

All requests for the anonymised individual-level data from HES and NPD used in this report should be submitted for review to NHS Digital and DfE and may be granted subject to completion of a data-sharing agreement. All other enquiries should be sent to the corresponding author.

This work was produced using statistical data from ONS. The use of the ONS statistical data in this work does not imply the endorsement of the ONS in relation to the interpretation or analysis of the statistical data. This work uses research datasets that may not exactly reproduce National Statistics aggregates.

Ethics and governance

Support for this study has been obtained from the Nottingham Research Ethics Committee (ref 18/EM/0014), the Department for Education (ref DR190430.02) and the Confidentiality Advisory Group (ref 18/CAG/0013). A Study Steering Committee oversaw the study and ensured it was conducted to rigorous standards. Support for the qualitative study was obtained from the University of Kent.

Department of Health and Social Care disclaimer

This publication presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by the interviewees in this publication are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, MRC, NIHR Coordinating Centre, the HSDR programme or the Department of Health and Social Care.

This monograph was published based on current knowledge at the time and date of publication. NIHR is committed to being inclusive and will continually monitor best practice and guidance in relation to terminology and language to ensure that we remain relevant to our stakeholders.

Publications

Cavallaro F, Gilbert R, Van der Meulen J, Kendall S, Kennedy E, Harron K. Intensive home visiting for adolescent mothers in the Family Nurse Partnership in England 2010–2019: a population-based data linkage cohort study using propensity score matching. BMJ Public Health 2024;2:e000514. https://doi.org/10.23889/ijpds.v7i3.1831

Disclaimers

This manuscript presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, the HSDR programme or the Department of Health and Social Care. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, the HSDR programme or the Department of Health and Social Care.

← References

Attribution. Francesca Cavallaro; Amanda Clery; Ruth Gilbert; Jan van der Meulen; Sally Kendall; Eilis Kennedy et al. (2024). Evaluating the real-world implementation of the Family Nurse Partnership in England: a data linkage study. National Institute for Health and Care Research. Copyright © 2024 Cavallaro et al. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK603930. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • Additional information

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support