» Articles » PMID: 31749993

Realist Evaluations in Low- and Middle-income Countries: Reflections and Recommendations from the Experiences of a Foreign Researcher

Overview
Journal BMJ Glob Health
Specialty Public Health
Date 2019 Nov 22
PMID 31749993
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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.

Citing Articles

A realist evaluation of the implementation of a national tobacco control programme and policy in India.

Hebbar P, Dsouza V, Nagelhout G, van Belle S, Srinivas P, Srinivas Prashanth N Health Policy Plan. 2024; 40(2):140-152.

PMID: 39185595 PMC: 11800981. DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czae081.


Community case management to accelerate access to healthcare in Mali: a realist process evaluation nested within a cluster randomized trial.

Whidden C, Cisse A, Cole F, Doumbia S, Guindo A, Karambe Y Health Policy Plan. 2024; 39(8):864-877.

PMID: 39058651 PMC: 11384120. DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czae066.


BREATHLEssness in INDIA (BREATHE-INDIA)-Study protocol for the co-design of a community breathlessness intervention in India using realist methods and intervention mapping.

Clark J, Salins N, Pearson M, Spathis A, Currow D, Williams S PLoS One. 2023; 18(11):e0293918.

PMID: 37917762 PMC: 10621994. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293918.


Realist Evaluation of the "Abiye" Safe Motherhood Initiative in Nigeria: Unveiling the Black-Box of Program Implementation and Health System Strengthening.

Oladimeji O, Fatusi A Front Health Serv. 2023; 2:779130.

PMID: 36925893 PMC: 10012745. DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2022.779130.


A realist review protocol on communications for community engagement in maternal and newborn health programmes in low- and middle-income countries.

Dada S, De Brun A, Banda E, Bhattacharya S, Mutunga Z, Gilmore B Syst Rev. 2022; 11(1):201.

PMID: 36096841 PMC: 9465973. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-022-02061-9.


References
1.
Gilmore B, McAuliffe E, Larkan F, Conteh M, Dunne N, Gaudrault M . How do community health committees contribute to capacity building for maternal and child health? A realist evaluation protocol. BMJ Open. 2016; 6(11):e011885. PMC: 5128909. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011885. View

2.
Jagosh J, Pluye P, Macaulay A, Salsberg J, Henderson J, Sirett E . Assessing the outcomes of participatory research: protocol for identifying, selecting, appraising and synthesizing the literature for realist review. Implement Sci. 2011; 6:24. PMC: 3072934. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-24. View

3.
Goicolea I, Coe A, Hurtig A, San Sebastian M . Mechanisms for achieving adolescent-friendly services in Ecuador: a realist evaluation approach. Glob Health Action. 2012; 5. PMC: 3409349. DOI: 10.3402/gha.v5i0.18748. View

4.
Rycroft-Malone J, Fontenla M, Bick D, Seers K . A realistic evaluation: the case of protocol-based care. Implement Sci. 2010; 5:38. PMC: 2889857. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-5-38. View

5.
Van Belle S, Marchal B, Dubourg D, Kegels G . How to develop a theory-driven evaluation design? Lessons learned from an adolescent sexual and reproductive health programme in West Africa. BMC Public Health. 2010; 10:741. PMC: 3001738. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-741. View