Domain D: Research Integration & Market Use¶
Using the domain reference
Domain D includes the five maturity descriptors and the source-verified minimum evidence for L3–L5. Expand the evidence section beneath each indicator and retain an auditable assessment record. See How to Apply HDRL.
Focus: Integration with research community; demonstrated use across sectors
Indicators: 8 (5 Core, 3 Enhancement)
The business question
Are people actually using the service? This measures real-world output, not theoretical capacity.
A health data service exists to enable research that improves health outcomes. This domain measures whether that is actually happening — active user counts, research publications, commercial partnerships, and clinical trial support. It shifts the assessment from "could we deliver?" to "are we delivering?" and captures the support infrastructure (helpdesks, training, reproducibility tools) that determines researcher experience.
Indicator Summary¶
| ID | Indicator | Type | Class | Unit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D.1.1 | Active User Base | Core | Y | Both |
| D.1.2 | Research Output & Impact | Core | Y | Both |
| D.2.1 | Researcher Support & Helpdesk | Core | B0 | Service |
| D.2.2 | Training & Capability Building | Enhancement | O | Service |
| D.2.3 | Reproducibility & Analytic Provenance Support | Core | B0 | Service |
| D.3.1 | Multi-Site Research Capability | Core | B0 | Both |
| D.3.2 | Commercial Access Framework | Enhancement | O | Both |
| D.4.1 | Trial Data & Recruitment | Enhancement | C4 | Both |
D.1 — User Base & Impact¶
D.1.1 Active User Base¶
CORE · Y (Outcome) · Both
Outcome indicator
This is an Outcome/Context indicator — reported for situational awareness but excluded from readiness scoring.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | Minimal activity. <10 projects. Internal researchers only. |
| L2 | Growing with 10-30 projects. External engaging. Pipeline developing. |
| L3 | Established with 30-75 projects. Mix of academic, NHS, commercial. Growing. |
| L4 | Substantial >= 75 projects (or >= 15/million pop). Diverse community. Demand exceeds supply. |
| L5 | Large >= 150 projects. International. High retention. Community promoting. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Project register demonstrating Level 3 activity level and mix (definition stated)
- Evidence of repeat use or sustained demand (pipeline metrics)
L4 minimum evidence
- Project register showing counts and segmentation (last 12 months definition)
- Evidence of active external user engagement (applications, onboarded users)
- Demand/throughput metrics (requests received vs provisioned)
L5 minimum evidence
- Retention/returning user metrics and pipeline evidence
- Evidence of international engagement/collaboration where claimed
- Independent validation or benchmarking of user base/activity (optional)
D.1.2 Research Output & Impact¶
CORE · Y (Outcome) · Both
Outcome indicator
This is an Outcome/Context indicator — reported for situational awareness but excluded from readiness scoring.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No tracking. Publications and impacts unknown. |
| L2 | Tracking initiated. Reporting requirement. Baseline identified. |
| L3 | Regular tracking with annual reporting. Publications cited. Selected case studies. |
| L4 | Comprehensive tracking. >= 30 publications/year (or >= 6/million pop). Health service impact. Policy influence. |
| L5 | Leadership with high-impact publications. Influencing practice/policy. Economic impact quantified. International recognition. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Annual publication/output tracking linked to datasets/services
- Initial impact case studies or policy/service influence examples
L4 minimum evidence
- Publication/output register linked to projects with annual reporting
- Impact case studies (service/policy) with traceable evidence
- Bibliometrics/altmetrics dashboard or report
L5 minimum evidence
- Evidence of high-impact outputs (citation metrics, journal quality) and translation to practice
- Economic/health impact quantification where available (methods + results)
- External recognition evidence (awards, invitations, international leadership)
D.2 — Research Support¶
D.2.1 Researcher Support & Helpdesk¶
CORE · B0 · Service
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No dedicated support. Researchers navigate independently. |
| L2 | Function identified. Basic documentation/FAQs. Variable response. |
| L3 | Dedicated helpdesk. Targets defined. Application and basic technical support. |
| L4 | Comprehensive: pre-submission, guidance, technical, analytical. SLAs (2-day response). Satisfaction surveyed. |
| L5 | Exemplary with proactive outreach. Account management. >= 80% satisfaction. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Dedicated support function with targets defined (SOP + staffing)
- Ticketing/helpdesk evidence showing response and resolution activity
L4 minimum evidence
- Helpdesk SOP + ticketing system export showing SLA performance and volumes
- Published support offer (pre-submission + technical/analytical) and staffing evidence
- User satisfaction survey results and improvement actions
L5 minimum evidence
- Proactive engagement/account management evidence (plans + activity logs)
- Sustained high satisfaction (>=80%) with methodology and response rate documented
- Evidence of service improvements driven by user insight (release notes, backlog)
D.2.2 Training & Capability Building¶
ENHANCEMENT · O · Service
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No provision. Researchers expected to have skills. |
| L2 | Needs identified. Ad-hoc training. Strategy developing. |
| L3 | Regular programme. Moderate uptake. |
| L4 | Comprehensive with multiple levels. Regular schedule. Linked to accreditation. |
| L5 | Extensive ecosystem. Co-developed. NHS analyst capacity building. Shared UK-wide. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Regular training programme delivered with attendance records
- Feedback/evaluation evidence and iteration over time
L4 minimum evidence
- Training curriculum + schedule + attendance records
- Evaluation evidence (feedback scores; learning outcomes where measured)
- Evidence of linkage to accreditation or capability plans
L5 minimum evidence
- Co-developed programme evidence (partners, PPIE involvement where relevant)
- Evidence of wide reach (NHS analyst capacity building) and reuse by others
- Materials shared (open resources) and evidence of continuous improvement
D.2.3 Reproducibility & Analytic Provenance Support¶
CORE · B0 · Service
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No reproducibility support. Code/data/environments not versioned. |
| L2 | Basic expectations documented. Tooling limited; relies on individuals. |
| L3 | Standard tools available. Partial provenance; inconsistent adoption. |
| L4 | Reproducibility-by-design. Versioned data/environments and provenance capture supported. |
| L5 | Automated provenance and reusable pipelines. Routine reproducibility audit and sharing. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Standard reproducibility tooling available (e.g., version control, notebooks) and guidance
- Evidence of partial adoption (some projects use versioning/provenance)
L4 minimum evidence
- Project template standards + guidance for reproducible analysis
- Evidence of versioned datasets and environments (release tags, snapshots, package locks)
- Provenance/audit logging evidence (who ran what, when, with which data/version)
L5 minimum evidence
- Automated provenance capture and containerised or equivalent reproducible environments
- Reusable pipelines/workflows (CI/CD, tests) with examples
- Evidence of reproducibility checks/audits and sharing tooling/practice beyond the service
D.3 — Multi-Site & Commercial Research¶
D.3.1 Multi-Site Research Capability¶
CORE · B0 · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No multi-site. Cannot combine with other UK nodes. |
| L2 | Requirements understood. Barriers identified. Pilot planned. |
| L3 | Possible with bespoke arrangements. >= 2 projects delivered. Effortful. |
| L4 | Routine capability. Standard processes. Participating in federated networks. |
| L5 | Leading capability. Proactively supporting UK-wide. Advanced federated. International. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Evidence of at least two multi-site projects delivered (cases)
- Documented multi-site process and agreements (even if bespoke)
L4 minimum evidence
- Standard multi-site/federated process documentation + template agreements
- Evidence of routine delivery (projects, networks participated in)
- Interoperability testing evidence (data model alignment, gateway/federation tests)
L5 minimum evidence
- Evidence of leadership role in UK-wide multi-site delivery (host/coordinate)
- Advanced federation capability evidence (scale, performance) and international links
- Evidence of supporting other nodes (implementation packs, mentoring)
D.3.2 Commercial Access Framework¶
ENHANCEMENT · O · Both
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No framework. Commercial access unclear. No IP policy. |
| L2 | Policy developing. Pricing discussed. IP under review. Pilots exploring. |
| L3 | Access permitted under conditions. Pricing exists. IP policy drafted. |
| L4 | Clear framework with published pricing/terms. IP aligned with Fair Value principles. Revenue contributing. |
| L5 | Mature offering. Competitive. Comprehensive IP. Diverse partnership models. Good practice. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Commercial access permitted under defined conditions (policy) and pricing exists
- Evidence of at least one commercial project delivered with documented terms
L4 minimum evidence
- Published commercial terms/pricing and IP policy aligned to Fair Value principles
- Governance evidence showing non-preferential access decisions and transparency
- Revenue/usage reporting and reinvestment approach (where applicable)
L5 minimum evidence
- Mature partnership models evidence (multiple routes, templates, case studies)
- Evidence of competitiveness and operational efficiency (cycle times, repeat customers)
- External assurance/independent review of commercial framework fairness (optional)
D.4 — Clinical Trials¶
D.4.1 Trial Data & Recruitment¶
ENHANCEMENT · C4 · Both
Capability module
Within HDRL v1.0's original six-capability mapping, this indicator is included only when assessing Capability 4 (Trial acceleration). The mapping preserves the initial 2025 UK Health Data Research Service (HDRS) proposition; it should not be treated here as a current programme requirement.
| Level | Description |
|---|---|
| L1 | No integration. Trial data flows separate. |
| L2 | Opportunities identified. Trials unit discussions. Feasibility assessed. |
| L3 | Selected services (feasibility, site identification). Some trial data flows. |
| L4 | Routine services. Follow-up linkable. IRAS/REC integration. |
| L5 | Comprehensive integration. Real-time recruitment. Contributing to UK trial acceleration. |
Minimum evidence for L3–L5
Use this source-defined minimum evidence with the maturity descriptors above. Record the artefact, date, scope and the claim it supports.
L3 minimum evidence
- Selected trial support services delivered (feasibility/site identification) with examples
- Trial-related data linkage possible for some studies (case evidence)
L4 minimum evidence
- Documented trial support offer integrated with access (feasibility, recruitment, follow-up linkage)
- Evidence of IRAS/REC alignment where applicable (process map + cases)
- Performance evidence (cycle times, number of supported studies)
L5 minimum evidence
- Evidence of real-time or near-real-time recruitment/feasibility support for priority pathways
- Demonstrated impact on trial delivery (metrics, case studies)
- Contribution to UK trial acceleration capability (shared methods, partnerships)