Protocol-the RAMESES II study: Developing guidance and reporting standards for realist evaluation

BMJ Open

Volumn 5, Issue 8, 2015, Pages

  Greenhalgh, Trisha ^a   Wong, Geoff ^a   Jagosh, Justin ^b   Greenhalgh, Joanne ^c   Manzano, Ana ^c   Westhorp, Gill ^d   Pawson, Ray ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^d Community Matters Pty Ltd ^*  (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BUDGET; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CONSENSUS; CONSULTATION; CURRICULUM; DATA ANALYSIS; DELPHI STUDY; E-MAIL; EVALUATION STUDY; FEEDING DIFFICULTY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH; LIKERT SCALE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT INFORMATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PEER REVIEW; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; POSTGRADUATE STUDENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLICATION; REALIST EVALUATION; SCIENTIST; SOCIAL MEDIA; STUDY DESIGN; TEACHING; THEMATIC ANALYSIS; WORKSHOP; EDUCATION; PERSONNEL; PUBLISHING; STANDARDS;

DELPHI TECHNIQUE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH PERSONNEL;

EID: 84941553777     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008567     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage, 2013.
2. Greenhalgh T, Kristjansson E, Robinson V. Realist review to understand the efficacy of school feeding programmes. BMJ 2007;335:858-61.
3. Greenhalgh T, Humphrey C, Hughes J, et al. How do you modernize a health service? A realist evaluation of whole-scale transformation in London. Milbank Q 2009;87:391-416.
4. Hoddinott P, Britten J, Pill R. Why do interventions work in some places and not others: a breastfeeding support group trial. Soc Sci Med 2010;70:769-78.
5. Ranmuthugala G, Cunningham F, Plumb J, et al. A realist evaluation of the role of communities of practice in changing healthcare practice. Implement Sci 2011;6:49.
6. RAPPORT: ReseArch with Patient and Public invOlvement: A Realist evaluaTion. NIHR INVOLVE conference; Leeds, 2012. http://www.invo.org.uk/posttypeconference/rapport-research-withpatientand-public-involvement-a-realist-evaluation
7. Randell R, Greenhalgh J, Hindmarch J, et al. Integration of robotic surgery into routine practice and impacts on communication, collaboration, and decision making: a realist process evaluation protocol. Implement Sci 2014;9:52.
8. Manzano-Santaella A. A realistic evaluation of fines for hospital discharges: incorporating the history of programme evaluations in the analysis. Evaluation 2011;17:21-36.
9. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage, 1997.
10. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage, 2006.
11. Marchal B, Van Belle S, Van Olmen J, et al. Is realist evaluation keeping its promise? A review of published empirical studies in the field of health systems research. Evaluation 2012;18:192-212.
12. Pawson R, Manzano-Santaella A. A realist diagnostic workshop. Evaluation 2012;18:176-91.
13. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, et al. Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses-Evolving Standards) project. Health Serv Deliv Res 2014;2:30.
14. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 2000;32:1008-15.
15. Campbell S, Roland M, Shekelle P, et al. Development of review criteria for assessing the quality of management of stable angina, adult asthma, and non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in general practice. Qual Health Care 1999;8:6-15.
16. Washington D, Bernstein S, Kahan J, et al. Reliability of clinical guideline development using mail-only versus inperson expert panels. Med Care 2003;41:1374-81.
17. Holliday C, Robotin M. The Delphi process: a solution for reviewing novel grant applications. Int J Gen Med 2010;3:225-30.
18. Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna H. Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. J Adv Nurs 2006;53:205-12.
19. Booth A, Harris J, Crott E, et al. Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual "richness" for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER). BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13:118.
20. Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. BMJ 2005;331:1064-5.
21. Jagosh J, Pluye P, Wong G, et al. Critical reflections on realist review: insights from customizing the methodology to the needs of participatory research assessment. Res Synth Methods 2014;5:131-41.
22. Marchal B, Westhorp G, Wong G, et al. Realist RCTs of complex interventions-an oxymoron. Soc Sci Med 2013;94:124-8.
23. Greenhalgh T, Wong G, Westhorp G, et al. Protocol-Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES). BMC Med Res Methodol 2011;11:115.
24. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, et al. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med 2013;11:21.
25. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, et al. RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. J Adv Nurs 2013;69:987-1004.
26. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, et al. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. J Adv Nurs 2013;69:1005-22.
27. Greenhalgh T, Wengraf T. Collecting stories: is it research? Is it good research? Preliminary guidance based on a Delphi study. Med Educ 2008;42:242-7.
28. Dalkin S, Greenhalgh J, Jones D, et al. What's in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation. Implement Sci 2015;10:49.