RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses

Abstract

Background: There is growing interest in realist synthesis as an alternative systematic review method. This approach offers the potential to expand the knowledge base in policy-relevant areas -for example, by explaining the success, failure or mixed fortunes of complex interventions. No previous publication standards exist for reporting realist syntheses. This standard was developed as part of the RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) project. The project's aim is to produce preliminary publication standards for realist systematic reviews. Methods: We (a) collated and summarized existing literature on the principles of good practice in realist syntheses; (b) considered the extent to which these principles had been followed by published syntheses, thereby identifying how rigor may be lost and how existing methods could be improved; (c) used a three-round online Delphi method with an interdisciplinary panel of national and international experts in evidence synthesis, realist research, policy and/or publishing to produce and iteratively refine a draft set of methodological steps and publication standards; (d) provided real-time support to ongoing realist syntheses and the open-access RAMESES online discussion list so as to capture problems and questions as they arose; and (e) synthesized expert input, evidence syntheses and real-time problem analysis into a definitive set of standards. Results: We identified 35 published realist syntheses, provided real-time support to 9 on-going syntheses and captured questions raised in the RAMESES discussion list. Through analysis and discussion within the project team, we summarized the published literature and common questions and challenges into briefing materials for the Delphi panel, comprising 37 members. Within three rounds this panel had reached consensus on 19 key publication standards, with an overall response rate of 91%. Conclusion: This project used multiple sources to develop and draw together evidence and expertise in realist synthesis. For each item we have included an explanation for why it is important and guidance on how it might be reported. Realist synthesis is a relatively new method for evidence synthesis and as experience and methodological developments occur, we anticipate that these standards will evolve to reflect further methodological developments. We hope that these standards will act as a resource that will contribute to improving the reporting of realist syntheses. To encourage dissemination of the RAMESES publication standards, this article is co-published in the Journal of Advanced Nursing and is freely accessible on Wiley Online Library

A systematic review of heart failure dyadic self-care interventions focusing on intervention components, contexts, and outcomes

“…Realist synthesis techniques (Pawson, Greenhalgh, Harvey, & Walshe, 2005;Wong, Greenhalgh, Westhorp, Buckingham, & Pawson, 2013) as in previous heart failure systematic reviews(H. G. Buck, Harkness, et al, 2015; were used to interpret the data elements across papers, analyze the nature and relationships between the data elements and draw conclusions about the higher order abstractions. In the first aim specific techniques included: data elements (actual intervention components) were identified in individual papers, aggregated across papers and then categorized.…”

Preventing domestic abuse for children and young people (PEACH): a mixed knowledge scoping review

“…Realist principles informed the study throughout, specifically in terms of the inclusion of stakeholder priorities at three critical time points, identification of the theories that underpinned the programmes under examination, and exploration of the trigger mechanisms that might explain both the intended and the unintended consequences of these programmes for specific groups of young people in particular contexts. 19,21 The methods described here are an amalgamation of those set out in the initial proposal, and of changes introduced as the project evolved, based on interactions with the consultation groups over time, and emerging data from the four main phases of the study. This emergent approach is a feature of realist synthesis, in which data from each iteration of a review inform the focus and processes of the next one.…”

Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings

“…However, methods papers focusing on integration are plentiful [22-27-23] and there are small but growing numbers of reviews aiming to integrate [28]. Further, the rapidly evolving methodology of realist review seeks to integrate different types of research evidence in order to understand M A N U S C R I P T A C C E P T E D ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 8 intervention context, mechanisms and outcomes [29][30]; and, within reviews, Qualitative Comparative Analysis aims to transcend the traditional qualitative / quantitative divide entirely [31][32]. Multiple challenges for integration persist such as the lack of worked examples and guidance, the additional expertise needed within review teams and an increase in the costs of conducting the review [33][34].…”