Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions

By R. Pawson, Trisha Greenhalgh, G. Harvey, K. Walshe. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 2005

2,943 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0da66f6f31d499a5b0d1cfa2a76b1c1d95e50bc3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

From BIM to digital twins: a systematic review of the evolution of intelligent building representations in the AEC-FM industry (2021, neutral): “The research began with a systematic literature review (Pawson et al. 2005) to locate and select relevant articles published in bibliographic databases.”
Evidence-based public health: a fundamental concept for public health practice. (2009, background): “Contextual issues are being addressed more fully in the new realist review, which is a systematic review process that seeks to examine not only whether an intervention works but also how interventions work in realworld settings (134).”
Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential (2011, neutral): “' (see also Pawson et al. 2005).”
Systematic Review. What is the evidence of the impact of microfinance on the well-being of poor people? (2011, methodology): “Thus reviews, systematic or other, may not resolve policy issues to the satisfaction of policy makers (Pawson et al. 2005).”
A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. (2009, methodology): “It has been suggested that some qualitative studies may be 'illuminating' whatever their quality (Sandelowski, 1993), although others state that primary studies must meet minimum criteria of rigour to be retained and synthesized in MSRs (Pawson et al., 2005).”
Critical Appraisal of Mixed Methods Studies (2013, background): “The authors who developed frameworks for undertaking systematic reviews applying MM approaches (e.g., Gaber, 2000; Harden & Thomas, 2005, 2010; Heyvaert et al., 2013; Onwuegbuzie et al., 2010; Pawson et al., 2005; Pluye et al., 2009b; Sandelowski et al., 2006; Whittemore & Knafl, 2005) do mention th”
A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects (2015, background): “Further detail about realist methodology can be found elsewhere [24, 27].”
A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9 (2007, background): “In keeping with the value of the emerging genre of realist review, we offer explanation rather than judgement and seek further understanding of the complexities of IPE (Pawson et al. 2005).”
Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews (2011, background): “…of systems thinking in evaluating programs and policies, moving evaluation beyond the “black‐box” approach to an approach that considers inputs, outputs, initial, intermediate, and eventual outcomes, along with program processes, contexts, and constraints (Pawson et al., 2005; Hawe et al., 2009).”
Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research (2012, neutral): “[2] suggest that realist syntheses are not for novices.”
High-Stakes Testing and Curricular Control: A Qualitative Metasynthesis (2007, methodology): “Second, reliability in template analysis is also improved when researchers are explicitly reflexive about both the process of their research and their positioning in relation to their study (King, 1998, 2006; Pawson et al., 2005).”
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2015, background): “Given that knowledge synthesis is not a new concept and that leading methodologists have proposed several approaches and methods to review the literature, it clearly appears that a typology is more aligned with our initial objective.”