The framework was generated utilising a mixed methods approach that applied co-design principles. A systematic literature review was carried out identifying academic papers. Other sources of information were also included, such as related national and international frameworks, policy documents and reports.

Main topics and themes were extracted and loosely grouped under headings as a bullet point list. This was used to stimulate discussion at 3 workshops targeting different groups of stakeholders.

Systematic literature review - Workshops x 3 with different stakeholder groups - Wider participation digital survey (N=49)
Systematic literature review → Workshops x 3 with different stakeholder groups → Wider participation digital survey (N=49)

The 3 workshops were carried out with multiple stakeholder groups. Workshops took place online using Zoom and collaboration software called Miro. The nominal group technique was used to facilitate the workshops (see box 2). 

The first workshop was aimed at early career digital leaders (Topol Digital Fellows and NHS Clinical Entrepreneur Fellows), the second included industry representatives (Babylon Health, Google Health, Bupa, and Barclays) recognising that much of digital transformation comes via partnerships with industry. The third and final workshop included educators and subject matter experts.

A draft framework was produced as a result of these workshops which was then distributed via a digital survey. Following feedback from 49 respondents, the framework was updated following a recommended iterative design approach20,21 leading to the vision seen in this report. 

Box 2: Phases of the Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

Nominal phase

Gives people the chance to consider information silently and individually. This was done offline prior to the workshop.

Item generation

A round-robin idea generation phase. This was carried out during the workshop with ideas captured on the Miro board.

Clarification and discussion

Items read aloud by facilitator. Participants can ask questions and seek clarifications about the ideas generated.


Finally a voting phase is carried out where ideas are placed on a grid which indicates their perceived importance and complexity. 


20 Greenhalgh, T., Macfarlane, F. (1997) Towards a competency grid for evidence-based practice. Eval Clin Pract 3:pp161-5

21 Davies, A., Mueller, J., Hassey, A., Moulton, G. (2021) Development of a core competency framework for clinical informatics. BMJ Health & Care Informatics 28:pp1-12

Page last reviewed: 14 February 2023
Next review due: 20 February 2024