UK Administrative Data Research Network Research Articles

The Good, the Bad, the Clunky: Improving the Use of Administrative Data for Research.

IntroductionAdministrative data arising via the operation of public service delivery systems hold great benefits for citizens and society by enabling new research questions to be addressed, providing they can be made available in a safe, socially acceptable way. In recognition of this potential, the UK Administrative Data Research Network was established in 2013 to enable new research for public benefit. However, there are considerable challenges to be overcome for effective data use, and many of these are common to administrative data enterprises in general. Using this network as a practical case study, we set out to explore the issues and propose how to share the ‘good’, suggest solutions to the ‘bad’, and improve the ‘clunky’ issues, to lead to improvements in administrative data use.MethodsA qualitative survey representing the data use pathway was carried out across the network, followed by a workshop to discuss the summarised findings and make further suggestions. This led to a set of recommendations to inform the development of an action plan for implementation.ResultsThe survey respondents (N=27) and workshop participants (N=95) comprised multi disciplinary staff from across the network. The responses were summarised by consensus of three researchers and grouped into six areas: A) Data acquisition pathway; B) Approval processes; C) Controls on access & disclosure; D) Data and metadata; E) Researcher support; and F) Data reuse & retention, leading to an embedded set of 18 recommendations. Key developments promoted by this study were the development of themed research partnerships to progress data acquisition, and a policy of data retention and reuse for research.ConclusionsThe network has broken new ground in using administrative data for research. This study informed the development of an evidence-based action plan to address many challenges in the effective use of administrative data. It represents a practical worked example, and the learning is widely relevant to enterprises working with administrative data across the world.

The Good, the Bad, the Clunky and . . . the Outcomes

BackgroundThere are there are considerable challenges to be addressed so the benefits of administrative data for research can be realised. Significant headway is being made, but there is great scope and appetite for further improvement.
 ObjectivesThis study set out to explore good practice, barriers and bottlenecks in effective administrative data use, and to gain suggestions on how to share the good, solve the bad and improve the clunky issues.
 MethodsUsing the ESRC-funded UK Administrative Data Research Network (ADRN) as the case study, a qualitative survey, focusing on the data use pathway, was carried out across the network. This encompassed a set of 18 questions spanning from acquisition to archiving. Survey responses were grouped into six themes: data acquisition; approval processes; controls on access and disclosure; data and metadata; researcher support; and data reuse and retention. The resulting information matrix was presented to participants at the All Hands meeting (April-May 2017) to facilitate discussion.
 FindingsSurvey responses were received from across the network (N=27) and 95 people took part in the workshop. The combined information from the survey and workshop was used to inform set of 18 recommendations across the 6 themes, and this has been used by the ADRN directors to develop an action plan for implementation.
 ConclusionsThe ADRN has broken new ground in overcoming many challenges in using administrative data for research in the UK. The recommendations and action plan show how further improvements will be made in the ADRCs, and the findings of this study are relevant more widely to other organisations working with administrative data.

The UK Administrative Data Research Network: Its Genesis, Progress, and Future

This article describes the ways in which UK administrative data are becoming more widely available for research. I outline the historical context of these developments, detail the network infrastructure that has now been put in place and discuss the continuing legal measures that are required to bring this network to fruition. I focus on the lessons that have been learned as work has progressed, drawing on this experience to elucidate some principles that may have relevance to similar attempts to promote better access to and linkage between administrative datasets in different cultural and legal settings.

Linking survey responses and administrative records without respondent consent to link; a discussion paper

ABSTRACTObjectives(i) Review the application and interpretation of the Data Protection Act (DPA) 1998; clarifying whether individual consent is required for data linkage for secondary research purposes, in consideration of the policies and principles of the UK Administrative Data Research Network (ADRN).
 (ii) Determine ethical, logistical or ‘tactical’ factors researchers might have to take into consideration.
 ApproachLinking survey data to administrative records offer potential advantage to both researchers and survey respondents. Informed, specific and explicit consent is typically a prerequisite for linkage. However, not all respondents consent to data-linkage resulting in a reduced and potentially biased sub-sample for analysis. In Northern Ireland consent rates for record linkage are typically about 50%.
 Discussion with the ICO confirms that the DPA may encourage rather than restrict research. S33 ‘research exemption’ supports secondary use of survey data subject to conditions such as that is for research purposes, it is not incompatible with the original purpose, and would not cause the data subjects substantial damage or distress. Other DPA principles remain in force; Principle 1 (fair and lawful processing) and the need to make data subjects ‘aware’ of the research: explicit consent is only one route by which this can be achieved. The Processing Sensitive Data Order (2000) protects the privacy of individuals. Research must be of substantial public interest with access only to data necessary to answer the research question. The ADRN enables access to de identified data for research purposes where identified public benefit is independently assured, maintains the privacy of individuals and ensures lawful “conditions of processing” are met.
 Resulting discussionLegal considerations aside, researchers may face other obstacles; the first is technical as the surveying agency may have deleted all linkable identifiers. The second is ethical as research ethics committee approval is a usual precondition. De-identification of individual subjects should be grounds for ethical approval where the research proposal includes a publication plan with appropriate methods to inform participants of research conducted and findings. Finally, the data custodians may not agree to the linkage for sound ‘tactical’ longer-term reasons, even if convinced of its legality.
 ConclusionUse of de identified survey data for research purposes is possible via the UK ADRN but raises other considerations for researchers and data custodians. We argue that this option should be used in limited circumstances.