Balancing realist review outputs with the needs of policymakers and practitioners.

Abstract

A realist review is a theory-driven approach to synthesizing evidence based on the realist philosophy of science. Realist reviews are conducted to provide the policy and practice community with a rich, detailed, and practical understanding of complex social interventions that will likely be of much more use to them when planning and implementing programs. Robust realist reviews must balance philosophical engagement, methodological rigor, and relevance to practice. Nevertheless, they have been criticized for being more philosophically inclined and less methodologically robust, with findings that have little implication for practice. Using the philosophy/Epistemology→methodology→theory→practice concept flow, we report how we balanced philosophical principles and practical insights in a recently conducted realist review on participatory practices that impact the benefits of non-communicable disease research and interventions in low- and middle-income countries. If realist review reviews are not comprehensible enough for these practitioners, their utility and relevance may suffer from being limited to a specialist cohort of academics. We propose that realist review findings and outputs must be framed and communicated to meaningfully engage practitioners without undertaking translational efforts.