A realist evaluation of a normal birth programme

Evidence Based Midwifery

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 112-119

  Abhyankar, Purva ^a   Cheyne, Helen ^a   Maxwell, Margaret ^a   Harris, Fiona ^a   McCourt, Christine ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Complex interventions; Evidence based midwifery; Normal birth; Programme evaluation; Realist evaluation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; DRAWING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MIDWIFE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROGRAM EVALUATION; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 85012834025     PISSN: 14794489     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Blamey A, Mackenzie M. (2007) Theories of change and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod or apples and oranges? Evaluation 13(4): 439-55.
2. Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, Tyrer P. (2000) Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. British Medical Journal 321(7262): 694-6.
3. Cheyne H, Abhyankar P, McCourt C. (2013) Empowering change: realist evaluation of a Scottish government programme to support normal birth. Midwifery 29(10): 1110-21.
4. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. (2008) Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. Medical Research Council: London.
5. Donabedian A. (1980) Explorations in quality assessment and monitoring: the definition of quality and approaches to its assessment (volume one). Health Administration Press: Ann Arbor, MI.
6. Greenhalgh G, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. (2004) Diffusion of innovations in service organisations: systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly 82(4): 581-629.
7. Greenhalgh T, Humphrey C, Hughes J, MacFarlane F, Butler C, Pawson R. (2009) How do you modernise a health service? A realist evaluation of whole-scale transformation in London. The Milbank Quarterly 87(2): 391-416.
8. Ling T. (2012) Evaluating complex and unfolding interventions in real time. Evaluation 18(1): 79-91.
9. Mackenzie M, O’Donnell C, Halliday E, Sridharan S, Platt S. (2010) Evaluating complex interventions: one size does not fit all. British Medical Journal 340(c185): 401-3.
10. McEvoy P, Richards D. (2003) Critical realism: a way forward for evaluation research in nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing 43(4): 411-20.
11. Medical Research Council. (2000) A framework for development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health. See: mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index.htm?d=MRC003372 (accessed 3 October 2013).
12. Pawson R. (2002) Evidence-based policy: in search of a method. Evaluation 8(2): 157-81.
13. Pawson R, Tilley N. (1997) Realistic evaluation. Sage: London.
14. Pawson R, Tilley N. (2004) Realist evaluation. See: communitymatters.com.au/ RE_chapter.pdf (accessed 3 October 2013).
15. Pawson R. (2013) The science of evaluation – a realist manifesto. Sage: London.
16. Richie J, Spencer L. (1994) Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research: In: Bryman A, Burgess R. (Eds.). Analysing qualitative data. Routledge: London: 173-94.
17. Robson C. (2011) Real world research: a resource for users of social research methods in applied settings. Wiley: Chichester.
18. Rossi PH, Lipsey MW, Freeman HE. (2004) Evaluation: a systematic approach. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
19. Scriven M. (1991) Evaluation thesaurus. Sage: London.
20. Weiss CH. (1997) Theory-based evaluation: past, present, and future. New Directions for Evaluation 76: 41-55.
21. Yin RK. (2009) Case study research: design and methods (fourth edition). Sage: London.