Skip to content
Implementation Science at UW

Keywords: Realist Review

✪ Mental health policy implementation in low- and middle-income countries: a realist review protocol

Authors:

Rangarirai Matima, Claire van der Westhuizen, Crick Lund, Ferdinand C. Mukumbang

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: March 2025

Read the full text in the open access journal PLOS One

Abstract:

Introduction

Formulating and implementing mental health policy is foundational to public mental health. The implementation of mental health policy varies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with some countries having better implementation outcomes than others. Low implementation poses challenges relating to addressing the high burden and wide treatment gaps of mental health conditions. While different implementation strategies are applied to implement mental health policy in different contexts, there is little knowledge of what category of strategies are being used and how and why their implementation produces varied outcomes. To this end, we propose to conduct a realist synthesis to explain how, why, for whom, and under what health system conditions certain policy implementation strategies work or not in LMICs.

Methods and analysis

This paper will detail the protocol on conducting a realist review of the literature on mental health policy implementation in LMICs. Realist reviews/syntheses are theory-driven reviews designed to formulate and test (confirm, refute, or refine) initial programme theories to explain how, why, for whom and under what contexts a programme, intervention or policy works as intended or not. Theory is built by exploring and abstracting context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in the data. These CMO configurations are identified through retroductive theorizing, a mechanism-centred approach to theory development. We will adopt these steps to guide the process of realist synthesis: i) identify the research question, clarifying the scope of the review and formulating the initial programme theory (ii) conducting background searches in PubMed, PsycINFO, Africa-Wide Information, African Index Medicus (AIM), CINAHL and Scopus databases, and grey literature (iii) appraising the quality of studies and data extraction and (iv) synthesising data.

Registration

The review is part of a realist evaluation exploring mental health policy implementation in LMICs and is registered under PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42024580312). Findings will inform the development of initial mental health policy implementation programme theories explaining why and how mental health policy implementation in LMICs works.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

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

Authors:

Ferdinand C Mukumbang, Sonja Klingberg, & Bipin Adhikari

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: October 2024

Read the full text in the open access journal Health Policy and Planning

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 programmes. Robust realist reviews must balance philosophical engagement, methodological rigour 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 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.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**