ReviewRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2020
Realist evaluation for programs and services in the health area: an integrative review of the theoretical and methodological literature.
Review in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Whole of government and whole of society approaches: call for further research to improve population health and health equity.BMJ global health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto identify and analyze the concepts of the realist evaluation and the methodologies recommended for its development in the health area.
methodan integrative review, which included theoretical and methodological studies published in the following databases: COCHRANE Library, EVIPNet, Health Systems Evidence, LILACS, PDQ-Evidence, PubMed, Rx for Change, and SciELO, in addition to Teses-CAPES and Google Scholar, for the gray literature. The mediation category underlay the analysis.
results19 references were included, published between 1997 and 2018. It is an innovative proposal to direct the process of evaluating health programs, interventions, and/or policies, with the democratic participation of the parties involved, such as users, workers, managers and researchers; it proposes to elaborate theories about what works, for whom, in what context, and how. The mediation category indicated the need for these theories not to be restricted to the micro-context, but to incorporate the elements of the social macro-structure to which they are connected.
conclusionIt is indicated that the realist evaluation is to be conducted in 21 stages. It takes into account qualitative and procedural methods, which makes it powerful for understanding human and social relationships in the context analyzed. Theories that come from evaluating the functioning of the programs analyzed have greater explanatory chances if they are built by reference to the social totality.
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.