RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses

BackgroundThere 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.MethodsWe (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.ResultsWe 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%.ConclusionThis 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 (http://www.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jan). Please see related article http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/20 and http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/22

[1]  M. Dieleman,et al.  Human resource management interventions to improve health workers' performance in low and middle income countries: a realist review , 2009, Health research policy and systems.

[2]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[3]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[4]  Guy M. Goodwin,et al.  Introduction to Systematic Reviews , 2004, Journal of psychopharmacology.

[5]  Sally Hopewell,et al.  [CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)] , 2010 .

[6]  F. Leeuw,et al.  Unpacking Black Boxes: Mechanisms and Theory Building in Evaluation , 2010 .

[7]  P. Fournier,et al.  Protocol: a realist review of user fee exemption policies for health services in Africa , 2012, BMJ Open.

[8]  James Thomas,et al.  Bmc Medical Research Methodology Methods for the Synthesis of Qualitative Research: a Critical Review , 2022 .

[9]  Gene Feder,et al.  AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[10]  G. Wong,et al.  Policy guidance on threats to legislative interventions in public health: a realist synthesis , 2011, BMC public health.

[11]  Jo Rycroft-Malone,et al.  Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research , 2012, Implementation Science.

[12]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Realist methods in medical education research: what are they and what can they contribute? , 2012, Medical education.

[13]  G. Wong,et al.  Known Knowns, Known Unknowns, Unknown Unknowns , 2011 .

[14]  J. Hughes,et al.  Does moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood improve mental health? A realist review of 'Moving to Opportunity'. , 2009, Health & place.

[15]  Michelle E. Kho,et al.  AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care , 2010, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[16]  G. Wong.  The Internet in Medical Education: A Worked Example of a Realist Review , 2012 .

[17]  Ray Pawson,et al.  Evidence-based Policy: The Promise of `Realist Synthesis' , 2002 .

[18]  R. Scherpbier,et al.  A realist synthesis of randomised control trials involving use of community health workers for delivering child health interventions in low and middle income countries , 2010, BMC health services research.

[19]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Realist synthesis - an introduction , 2004 .

[20]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances , 2010, BMC medical education.

[21]  Robert K. Merton,et al.  On Theoretical Sociology: Five Essays, Old and New , 1967 .

[22]  D. Moher,et al.  CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[23]  Mary Dixon-Woods,et al.  Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. , 2005, Journal of health services research & policy.

[24]  A. Tricco,et al.  What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[25]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Uncovering the Benefits of Participatory Research: Implications of a Realist Review for Health Research and Practice , 2012, The Milbank quarterly.

[26]  D. Anthony.  Evidence-based Policy: A Realist Perspective , 2007 .

[27]  Greg Ogrinc,et al.  Publication guidelines for improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE Project. , 2008, Annals of internal medicine.

[28]  M. Pearson,et al.  The challenge of external validity in policy-relevant systematic reviews: a case study from the field of substance misuse. , 2010, Addiction.

[29]  Trisha Greenhalgh,et al.  Protocol - realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) , 2011, BMC medical research methodology.

[30]  S. Kane,et al.  Realist review and synthesis of retention studies for health workers in rural and remote areas , 2011 .

[31]  J. Furedy,et al.  A realist perspective. , 1990 .

[32]  Aziz Sheikh,et al.  Can We Systematically Review Studies That Evaluate Complex Interventions? , 2009, PLoS medicine.

[33]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration , 2009, Annals of Internal Medicine [serial online].