Realist evaluations: relevance to pharmacy practice and education
Rattachement africain : au, us, ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: To explore realist evaluations, focusing on their utility in pharmacy-related practice and education research. METHODS: Realist evaluations are a theory-driven approach to research that provides a robust account of the nature of programs and how they work in answering the question, "what works (or does not work) for whom in what circumstances and why (not)?". In realist evaluations, the context in which it is implemented, the mechanisms that trigger change, and the outcomes that result are explored. KEY FINDINGS: Realist evaluations provide a more informed approach to targeting and refining programs to suit a diverse and complex healthcare system. Realist evaluations have been used by researchers from a variety of health professional disciplines to evaluate programs and interventions to improve public health, health care policy, and tertiary education institutions. Examples of the complex settings where researchers have used this method for the evaluation process include supervision training workshops, rural immersion training programs, faculty development courses, safe medication administration programs, and the ability of managers to effect change. CONCLUSION: Realist evaluations are powerful methodological approaches for studying complex interventions and support managing the nuances associated with constrained resources, differing governing policies and diverse population groups.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Realist evaluations: relevance to pharmacy practice and education
- Date Crossref
- 12/11/2025
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.