Protocol - realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES)
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 16 August 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Vol. 11 (1) , 115
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-115
Abstract
There is growing interest in theory-driven, qualitative and mixed-method approaches to systematic review as an alternative to (or to extend and supplement) conventional Cochrane-style reviews. These approaches offer the potential to expand the knowledge base in policy-relevant areas - for example by explaining the success, failure or mixed fortunes of complex interventions. However, the quality of such reviews can be difficult to assess. This study aims to produce methodological guidance, publication standards and training resources for those seeking to use the realist and/or meta-narrative approach to systematic review.Keywords
This publication has 47 references indexed in Scilit:
- Development of mental health first aid guidelines for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experiencing problems with substance use: a Delphi studyBMC Psychiatry, 2010
- The Delphi process: a solution for reviewing novel grant applicationsInternational Journal of General Medicine, 2010
- Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstancesBMC Medical Education, 2010
- How Can We Support the Use of Systematic Reviews in Policymaking?PLoS Medicine, 2009
- Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviewsBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2008
- Realist review to understand the efficacy of school feeding programmesBMJ, 2007
- Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus processBMJ, 2006
- Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventionsJournal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2005
- Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and RecommendationsThe Milbank Quarterly, 2004