A roadmap to realist interviews in health professions education research: Recommendations based on a critical analysis.

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 7605655 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1365-2923 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 03080110 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Med Educ Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: Oxford : Wiley-Blackwell
Original Publication: Oxford, Blackwell Scientific Publications.

Health Occupations*/education ; Interviews as Topic* ; Research Design*/standards; Humans ; Qualitative Research ; Guidelines as Topic

Context: Realist evaluation is increasingly employed in health professions education research (HPER) because it can unpack the extent to which complex educational interventions work (or not), for whom under what circumstances and how. While realist evaluation is not wedded to particular methods, realist interviews are commonly the primary, if not only, data collection method in realist evaluations. While qualitative interviewing from an interpretivist standpoint has been well-articulated in the HPER literature, realist interviewing differs substantially. The former elicits participants' views and experiences of a topic of inquiry, whereas realist interviewing focuses on building, testing and/or refining programme theory. Therefore, this article aims to help readers better understand, conduct, report and critique realist interviews as part of realist evaluations.
Methods: In this paper, we describe what realist approaches are, what realist interviewing is and why realist interviewing matters. We outline five stages to realist interviewing (developing initial programme theory, realist sampling/samples, the interview itself, realist analysis and reporting realist interviews), drawing on two illustrative cases from our own realist evaluations employing interviewing to bring theory to life. We provide a critical analysis of 12 realist evaluations employing interviewing in the HPER literature. Alongside reporting standards, and our own realist interviewing experiences, this critical analysis of published articles serves to foreground our recommendations for realist interviewing.
Conclusions: We encourage HPE researchers to consider realist interviews as part of realist evaluations of complex interventions. Our critical analysis reveals that realist interviews can provide unique insights into HPE, but authors now need to report their sampling approach, type of interviewing and interview questions more explicitly. Studies should also more explicitly draw on existing realist interviewing literature and follow reporting guidelines for realist evaluations. We hope this paper provides a useful roadmap to conducting, reporting and critically appraising realist interviews in HPER.
(© 2023 The Authors. Medical Education published by Association for the Study of Medical Education and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Rees CE, Crampton PES, Nguyen VNB, et al. Introducing realist approaches in health professions education research. In: Rees CE, Monrouxe LV, O'Brien BC, et al., eds. Foundations in Health Professions Education Research: Principles, Perspectives & Practices. West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell; 2023:102‐121.
Ellaway RH, Kehoe A, Illing J. Critical realism and realist inquiry in medical education. Acad Med. 2020;95(7):984‐988. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000003232.
Mukumbang FC, De Souza DE, Eastwood JG. The contributions of scientific realism and critical realism to realist evaluation. J Crit Realism. 2023;22(3):504‐524. doi:10.1080/14767430.2023.2217052.
Marchal B, Kegels G, Van Belle S. Theory and realist methods. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, et al., eds. Doing Realist Research. London: SAGE; 2018:79‐89.
Manzano A. The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation. Evaluation. 2016;22(3):342‐360. doi:10.1177/1356389016638615.
Greenhalgh T, Pawson R, Wong G, et al. The realist interview. The RAMESES II Project. www.ramesesproject.org; 2017.
McGrath C, Palmgren PJ, Lilijedahl M. Twelve tips for conducting qualitative research interviews. Med Teach. 2019;41(9):1002‐1006. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2018.1497149.
DiCicco‐Bloom B, Crabtree BF. The qualitative research interview. Med Educ. 2006;40(4):314‐321. doi:10.1111/j.1365‐2929.2006.02418.x.
Bearman M. Eliciting rich data: a practical approach to writing semi‐structured interview schedules. Focus Health Prof Educ: Multi‐Prof J. 2019;20(3):1‐11. doi:10.11157/fohpe.v20i3.387.
Nguyen VB, Rees CE, Ottrey E, et al. What really matters for supervision training workshops? A realist evaluation. Acad Med. 2022;97(8):1203‐1212.
Rees CE, Nguyen VNB, Ottrey E, et al. The effectiveness of extended‐duration supervision training for nurses and allied health professionals: a realist evaluation. Nurs Educ Today. 2022;110:105225.
Proctor D, Leeder D, Mattick K. The case for faculty development: a realist evaluation. Med Educ. 2020;54(9):832‐842.
Pawson R. Theorizing the interview. Br J Sociol. 1996;47(2):295‐314. doi:10.2307/591728.
Given LM. The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. London: SAGE; 2008.
Bloom B, Moren S. Analysis of generative mechanism. J Crit Realism. 2011;10(1):60‐79. doi:10.1558/jcr.v10i1.60.
Crotty M. The Foundations of Social Research. Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. London: SAGE; 2003.
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE Publications; 1997.
Wong G, Westhorp G, Manzano A, Greenhalgh J, Jagosh J, Greenhalgh T. RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations. BMC Med. 2016;14(1):96. doi:10.1186/s12916‐016‐0643‐1.
Brekke J, Anastas J, Floersch J, Longhofer J. The realist frame: scientific realism and critical realism. In: Brekke J, Anastas J, eds. Shaping a Science of Social Work: Professional Knowledge and Identity. Online ed. New York: Oxford Academic; 2019:22‐40.
Rees CE, Lee SL, Huang E, et al. Supervision training in healthcare: a realist synthesis. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2020;25(3):523‐561.
Westhorp G. Realist Impact Evaluation: An Introduction. Overseas Development Institute; 2014.
Mattick K, Barnes R, Dieppe P. Medical education: a particularly complex intervention to research. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2013;18(4):769‐778. doi:10.1007/s10459‐012‐9415‐7.
Greenhalgh J, Manzano A. Understanding ‘context’ in realist evaluation and synthesis. Int J Social Res Methods. 2022;25(5):583‐595. doi:10.1080/13645579.2021.1918484.
Astbury B, Leeuw FL. Unpacking black boxes: mechanisms and theory building in evaluation. Am J Eval. 2010;31(3):363‐381. doi:10.1177/1098214010371972.
Westhorp G. Understanding mechanisms in realist research. In: Emmel N, Greenhalgh J, Manzano A, et al., eds. Doing Realist Research. London: SAGE; 2018:41‐58.
Bronnimann A. How to phrase critical realist interview questions in applied social science research. J Crit Realism. 2021;21(1):1‐24. doi:10.1080/14767430.2021.1966719.
Mukumbang FC, Marchal B, van Belle S, van Wyk B. Using the realist interview approach to maintain theoretical awareness in realist studies. Qual Res. 2020;20(4):485‐515. doi:10.1177/1468794119881985.
Manzano A. Conducting focus groups in realist evaluation. Evaluation. 2022;28(4):406‐425. doi:10.1177/13563890221124637.
Bonnell C, Warren E, Melendez‐Torres GJ. Methodological reflections on using qualitative research to explore the causal mechanisms of complex health interventions. Evaluation. 2022;28(2):166‐181. doi:10.1177/13563890221086309.
Westhorp G, Manzano A. Realist evaluation interviewing—a ‘starter set’ of questions. The RAMESES II Project. www.ramesesproject.org; 2017.
Gilmore B, McAuliffe E, Power J, Vallières F. Data analysis and synthesis within a realist evaluation: towards more transparent methodological approaches. Int J Qual Methods. 2019;18:1‐11. doi:10.1177/1609406919859754.
Bergeron DA, Gaboury I. Challenges related to the analytical process in realist evaluation and latest developments on the use of NVivo from a realist perspective. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2020;23(3):355‐365. doi:10.1080/13645579.2019.1697167.
Dalkin S, Forster N, Hodgson P, Lhussier M, Carr SM. Using computer‐assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS: NVivo) to assist in the complex process of realist theory generation, refinement and testing. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2021;24(1):123‐134. doi:10.1080/13645579.2020.1803528.
Bingham A, O’Sullivan B, Couch D, Cresser S, McGrail M, Major L. How rural immersion training influences rural work orientation of medical students: theory building through realist evaluation. Med Teach. 2021;43(12):1398‐1405. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2021.1948520.
Ellaway RH, Palacios Mackay M, Lee S, et al. The impact of a national competency‐based medical education initiative in family medicine. Acad Med. 2018;93(12):1850‐1857. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000002387.
Lefroy J, Yardley S, Kinston R, Gay S, McBain S, McKinley R. Qualitative research using realist evaluation to explain preparedness. Med Educ. 2017;51(1):1037‐1048. doi:10.1111/medu.13370.
Haruta J, Yamamoto Y. Realist approach to evaluating an interprofessional education program for medical students in clinical practice at a community hospital. Med Teach. 2020;42(1):101‐110. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2019.1665633.
Onyura B, Ng S, Baker LR, Lieff S, Millar BA, Mori B. A mandala of faculty development: using theory‐based evaluation. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2017;22(1):165‐186. doi:10.1007/s10459‐016‐9690‐9.
Ogrinc G, Ercolano E, Cohen ES, et al. Educational system factors that engage resident physicians in an integrated quality improvement curriculum at a VA hospital: a realist evaluation. Acad Med. 2014;89(10):1380‐1385. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000389.
Browne F, Hannigan B, Harden J. A realist evaluation of a safe medication administration education programme. Nurs Educ Today. 2021;97:104685. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104685.
Sorinola OO, Thistlethwaite J, Davies D, Peile E. Faculty development for educators: a realist evaluation. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2015;20(2):385‐401. doi:10.1007/s10459‐014‐9534‐4.
Sorinola OO, Thistlethwaite J, Davies D, Peile E. Realist evaluation of faculty development for medical educators: what works for whom and why in the long‐term. Med Teach. 2017;39(4):422‐429. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2017.1293238.

Date Created: 20231211 Date Completed: 20240502 Latest Revision: 20240512

20240512

10.1111/medu.15270

38073499