ReviewMedical education2025
Realist analysis of qualitative data in health professions education research.
Review in Medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimising professional support for doctors who experience work performance issues: a realist evaluation.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Challenges, Strategies, and Explanatory Mechanisms in Clinical Skills Remediation Programs in Undergraduate and Postgraduate Medical Education in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Realist Review Protocol.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Mental health placements for health and social care students: A realist synthesis.Medical education · 2026Review
- Australian General Practitioners' perspectives, experiences and use of non-drug interventions in primary care: a qualitative study.Family medicine and community health · 2026Article
- Article
- Developing community-based programme theories to address unmet needs of people experiencing homelessness and severe mental illness: protocol for a realist review.NIHR open research · 2026Article
- Strengthening health research capacity for postgraduate trainees: an indigenous realist evaluation of the 'African Research Initiative for Scientific Excellence' programme.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- Evaluating pharmacist prescribing education programmes: a realist synthesis protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Realist analysis of qualitative data in health professions education research.Medical education · 2025Review
- How Organisational and Socio-Cultural Contexts Shape Healthcare Workers' Intrinsic, Prosocial, and Public Service Motivation in Africa: A Scoping Review.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- Expanding the toolkit: a call for embracing methodological diversity in healthcare professions education research.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQualitative realist analysis is gaining in popularity in health professions education research (HPER) as part of theory-driven program evaluation. Although realist approaches such as syntheses and evaluations typically advocate mixed methods, qualitative data dominate currently. Various forms of qualitative analysis have been articulated in HPER, yet realist analysis has not. Although realist analysis is interpretive, it moves beyond description to explain generative causation employing retroductive theorising. Ultimately, it attempts to build and/or 'test' (confirm, refute or refine) theory about how, why, for whom, when and to what extent programs work using the context-mechanism-outcome configuration (CMOC) heuristic. This paper aims to help readers better critique, conduct and report qualitative realist analysis. REALIST ANALYSIS
methodsWe describe four fundamentals of qualitative realist analysis: (1) simultaneous data collection/analysis; (2) retroductive theorising; (3) configurational analysis (involving iterative phases of identifying CMOCs, synthesising CMOCs into demi-regularities and translating demi-regularities into program theory); and (4) realist analysis quality (relevance, rigour, richness). Next, we provide a critical analysis of realist analyses employed in 15 HPER outputs-three evaluations and 12 syntheses. Finally, drawing on our understandings of realist literature and our experiences of conducting qualitative realist analysis (both evaluations and syntheses), we articulate three common analysis challenges (coding, consolidation and mapping) and strategies to mitigate these challenges (teamwork, reflexivity and consultation, use of data analysis software and graphical representations of program theory).
conclusionsBased on our critical analysis of the literature and realist analysis experiences, we encourage researchers, peer reviewers and readers to better understand qualitative realist analysis fundamentals. Realist analysts should draw on relevant realist reporting standards and literature on realist analysis to improve the quality and reporting of realist analysis. Through better understanding the common challenges and mitigation strategies for realist analysis, we can collectively improve the quality of realist analysis in HPER.
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.