ArticlePloS one2026
Realist methodologies informing the development, implementation, and scale-up of complex socio-medical interventions: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding how and why complex socio-medical interventions work across diverse settings is essential for addressing health inequities. Realist methodologies, grounded in realism, provide a framework to explain what works, for whom, in what contexts, and why by focusing on generative mechanisms and contextual conditions. While realist approaches have been extensively applied in implementation science, it is unclear to what extent they have been applied across the development, implementation, and scale-up phases of interventions. This scoping review aims to map how realist methodologies have been applied to inform the lifecycle of complex socio-medical interventions.
methodsWe plan to follow the framework of Arksey and O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) as well as PRISMA-ScR guidelines, to map how realist methodologies have been applied to inform the lifecycle of complex socio-medical interventions. Four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) will be searched, supplemented by grey literature and citation tracking. Two reviewers will independently screen peer-reviewed, English and Spanish-language, realist-informed studies. We will chart data on study characteristics, intervention details, realist findings (e.g., Context-Mechanism-Outcomes, programme theories), and methodological insights. We will include descriptive, thematic, and narrative synthesis, as well as network visualization. The protocol is registered in open science framework (OSF) registries (https://osf.io/t8z2b/overview). DISCUSSION: We expect to identify how realist inquiry contributes to building explanatory programme theories that guide the development, implementation, and scale-up/adaptation of complex socio-medical interventions. This review will offer practical insights for implementation scientists and healthcare practitioners on how and why complex health interventions work and can be adapted for successful implementation. Understanding the adoption of realist methodologies across the intervention lifecycle will enhance the design, implementation, and effective scale-up of socio-medical interventions in complex settings.
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.