ReviewBMJ global health2019
Realist evaluations in low- and middle-income countries: reflections and recommendations from the experiences of a foreign researcher.
Review in BMJ global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community case management to accelerate access to healthcare in Mali: a realist process evaluation nested within a cluster randomized trial.Health policy and planning · 2024Trial
- Exploring change mechanisms of implementation strategies for providing guideline-adherent care by interprofessional teams in inpatient settings: a realist synthesis.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
- How to do (or not to do) realist evaluations to advance theory, practice, and justice in health systems research.Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Tailored job coaching for people with severe mental illness living in supported housing settings: A realist approach.PloS one · 2026Article
- Understanding health innovation adoption: a realist evaluation of pulse oximeter implementation in primary care for children under 5 in four West African countries.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Context and generalizability in health policy and systems research: a plea for an integrative praxis of theorizing.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Dynamics in implementing the Good Financial Grant Practice standard across three African universities: an Indigenous realist evaluation.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- We move together: a realist evaluation of the Safe Motherhood Action Groups in Eastern Province, Zambia.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- 'Community people are the most powerful resources': qualitative critical realist analysis and framework to support co-produced responses to zoonotic disease threats with(in) Nepali communities.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Bridging the gap: translating and simplifying CFIR 2.0 for French practitioners in implementation science.Implementation science communications · 2025Article
- A realist evaluation of the implementation of a national tobacco control programme and policy in India.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- How can the ethical conduct of verbal autopsies be enhanced? Lessons from Southeast Asia.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2025Article
- A realist evaluation of a novel cervical cancer prevention strategy in Iquitos, Peru.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Article
- A realist review protocol on communications for community engagement in maternal and newborn health programmes in low- and middle-income countries.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Principles to guide the effective use of technology to support capacity development in global health partnerships.BMJ global health · 2022Article
- Article
- Realist Evaluation of the "Abiye" Safe Motherhood Initiative in Nigeria: Unveiling the Black-Box of Program Implementation and Health System Strengthening.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
- Role of trust in sustaining provision and uptake of maternal and child healthcare: Evidence from a national programme in Nigeria.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Article
- Tracing theories in realist evaluations of large-scale health programmes in low- and middle-income countries: experience from Nigeria.Health policy and planning · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Realist evaluation, a methodology for exploring generative causation within complex health interventions to understand 'how, why and for whom' programmes work, is experiencing a surge of interest. Trends indicate that the proliferation in the use of this methodology also applies to research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The value of using realist evaluation for project evaluation is also being noticed by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other programme implementers within such contexts. Yet, there is limited exploration of the use of realist evaluations in LMICs, especially their use by foreign researchers. This paper draws on the author's experience of conducting two realist evaluations across three different sub-Saharan African settings: Mundemu, Tanzania; Kabale, Uganda and Marsabit, Kenya. The realist evaluations were used as an operations research methodology to study two NGO community health programmes. This paper highlights four main challenges experienced by the author throughout the methodological process: (1) power imbalances prevalent during realist interviews, (2) working through translation and what this means for identfying Context-Mechanism-Outcome Configurations, (3) limited contextual familiarity and being an 'engaged researcher' and (4) the use or dependence on 'WEIRD' theories (i.e. theories based on the study of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic people) within testing and refinement. Realist evaluation's enticing and straightforward slogan of finding 'what works, for whom and why' is in contrast to the complexity of the methodology used to generate these results (and often to the results themselves). Striking a balance between theory and pragmatism, while adhering to realist ontological underpinnings of generative causation and retroduction, is no easy task. This paper concludes by providing concrete recommendations for those who want to undertake a realist evaluation, with particular attention to cross-cultural settings, in light of the aforementioned challenges. In doing so, it aims to foster improved methodological rigour and help those engaging in this research methodology to work towards more appropriate and contextually relevant findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.