Bringing evidence closer to decision making: Thames Valley Value Lab launch

By bringing together health economics, data science and implementation research, the Value Lab aims to strengthen how services are evaluated, resources are allocated and practical evidence is generated across the region. Health Innovation Oxford and Thames Valley (HIOTV) was invited to join the panel on innovation and commissioning. This reflects our role as the health innovation network for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire, and our close partnership with Thames Valley ICB and NIHR ARC Thames Valley.

Why NHS innovation adoption needs more than good evidence

Representing HIOTV, Dr James Rose, our Director of Strategic and Industry Partnerships, highlighted that adoption depends on more than the promise of an innovation. It requires co-design around system priorities, evaluation at the right stage of maturity, and evidence that speaks to the decisions commissioners, providers and system partners need to make. Examples such as Brainomix 360 Stroke, Sleepio and the PlGF blood test brought this into focus. Brainomix 360 Stroke and the PlGF blood test show how well-evidenced innovations can move from pathway need to practical adoption and spread across the NHS, while Sleepio shows the importance of supporting innovations towards adoption readiness.

For HIOTV, this is central to our role. We support the development, evaluation, adoption and scaling of innovations in ways that respond to system priorities. When done well, innovation can be transformative and integrative: changing how diseases are understood, diagnosed, managed and treated, while enabling adoption across NHS services and organisations through more connected pathways.

Valuing prevention alongside treatment

The wider discussion raised several important reflections. One was the challenge of valuing prevention alongside treatment and management. Treatment often has established clinical endpoints, validated measures, trial data and economic outputs. Prevention is harder to evidence in the same way because its value may lie in avoided deterioration, reduced future demand or disease burden that never materialises. Developing clearer indicators to make this value visible is essential if prevention is to be considered on a more equal footing with treatment and management in decision-making.

This is particularly relevant for HIOTV, where our innovation portfolio spans the journey from prevention and early intervention through to diagnosis, treatment and disease management. Across that continuum, different forms of value need to be evidenced in ways that are meaningful for decision makers.

Why relationships matter for adoption

The discussion also reinforced that people, organisations and systems do not align by osmosis. Adoption depends on deliberate, mutually reinforcing relationships between researchers, commissioners, innovators, providers and communities, with evidence generated in ways that are both robust and usable.

Recognising value beyond cash release

A further question came through the discussion on decommissioning: how do we recognise value when interventions are not cash-releasing? Some interventions may not return money directly to budgets but may still create meaningful system value by improving flow, protecting capacity, reducing future demand, supporting the workforce or improving equity. The challenge is not simply to label these interventions as cost-saving or not, but to build business cases that make these different forms of value visible, measurable and decision-relevant. If value extends beyond clinical success or cash release, should our indicators not be wider too, capturing ROI, productivity, absenteeism and presenteeism, workforce capacity, avoided demand, inequalities and wider social value? For HIOTV, this speaks directly to our work in evidence generation, evaluation and adoption support.

What this means for innovators

The Value Lab is new, but the message for innovators is not.

Evidence alone doesn’t get your innovation adopted. You need to show it fits system priorities too.

Think beyond the clinical trial, commissioners want to see other things: Does your innovation save staff time? Does it ease pressure on services? Does it help reduce inequalities? These count as value too, you need to measure them and explain them clearly.

Prevention is hard to evidence. If your innovation stops a problem before it starts, plan early for how you will prove that value. Waiting until you need the evidence is too late.