Data Analysis and Synthesis Within a Realist Evaluation: Toward More Transparent Methodological Approaches
Open accessAbstract
Realist evaluations are increasingly used in the study of complex health interventions. The methodological procedures applied within realist evaluations however are often inexplicit, prompting scholars to call for increased transparency and more detailed description within realist studies. This publication details the data analysis and synthesis process used within two realist evaluation studies of community health interventions taking place across Uganda, Tanzania, and Kenya. Using data from several case studies across all three countries and the data analysis software NVivo, we describe in detail how data were analyzed and subsequently synthesized to refine middle-range theories. We conclude by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the approach taken, providing novel methodological recommendations. The aim of providing this detailed descriptive account of the analysis and synthesis in these two studies is to promote transparency and contribute to the advancement of realist evaluation methodologies.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Pawson, R. (2006) · doi:10.4135/9781849209120 · Cited by 1,791 · see citing works
RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses
Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., & Pawson, R. (2013) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-21 · Cited by 1,374 · see citing works
Marchal, B., van Belle, S., van Olmen, J., Hoerée, T., & Kegels, G. (2012) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1356389012442444 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
Fletcher, A., Jamal, F., Moore, G., Evans, R. E., Murphy, S., & Bonell, C. (2016) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1356389016652743 · Cited by 294 · see citing works
A realistic evaluation: the case of protocol-based care
Rycroft-Malone, J., Fontenla, M., Bick, D., & Seers, K. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-38 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Gilmore, B., McAuliffe, E., Power, J., & Vallières, F.
- Affiliations
- Trinity College Dublin (IE)
- School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, College of Health and Agricultural Sciences, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
- Corresponding author
- Gilmore, Brynne
- Venue
- International Journal of Qualitative Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-01-01
- Volume
- 18
- ISSN
- 1609-4069 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2955563742
- Cited by
- 296
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 41 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 13.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Qualitative Methods (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- H2020 Marie Sk?odowska-Curie Actions (grant agreement No 713279)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Keywords
- realist evaluation, data analysis, data synthesis, middle-range theory, transparency, community health intervention, complex health interventions, qualitative data analysis, NVivo, methodological recommendations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review