Abstract
From the perspective of complexity science the deterministic approach of Cochrane systematic reviews appears very restricted, seemingly missing the complex interaction between social and environmental context, individuals and social groups, health care providers and specific health interventions. However, the Cochrane Collaboration has established a rigour for evidence review of the effect of interventions. This rigour is applied to research questions that use peer reviewed published empirical evidence as their data source. This paper considers the role of Cochrane style reviews for our complex world and compares this with a realist approach to the review of research literature, which seeks to understand how and why an intervention works in particular contexts. Both recognise complexity, both include the identification of what the intervention is intended to do, both recognise the importance of context, and rigour is equally important in both. However, Cochrane reviews limit the reach of the review to specific contexts whereas realist reviews seek to understand how interventions work in differing contexts. Cochrane reviews seek to include studies of interventions with similar components. These components are context specific manifestations of the theory on which the intervention is based. Realist reviews seek to understand how theoretical mechanisms are manifest in different contexts. For collaborative international research a Cochrane review may need to be undertaken separately for contexts that are very different such as high and low income countries. However, the realist review itself seeks to understand how context makes a difference to outcome, and is therefore strengthened by comparison of different contexts. Cochrane style and realist reviews can be complimentary in advancing our understanding of our complex world and how complex interventions have their effect. Further research will be stimulated through comparative realist reviews that identify the variation in how interventions work or not across very different contexts.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
The Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2014. Available from: http://www.cochrane.org/. 20 Oct 2014
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2008;337:a1655
Bonell C, Fletcher A, Morton M, Lorenc T, Moore L. Methods don’t make assumptions, researchers do: a response to Marchal et al. Soc Sci Med. 2013;94:81–2
Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. Br Med J. 2007;334(7591):455–9
Lamb S, Lall R, Hansen Z, Castelnuovo E, Withers EJ, Nichols V, et al. A multicentred randomised controlled trial of a primary care-based cognitive behavioural programme for low back pain. The Back Skills Training (BeST) trial. Health Technol Assess (Winchester, England). 2010;14(41):1–253, iii–iv
Shepperd S, Lewin S, Straus S, Clarke M, Eccles MP, et al. Can We Systematically Review Studies That Evaluate Complex Interventions? PLoS Med. 2009;6(8):e1000086. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000086
Barry A, Thrift N. Gabriel Tarde: imitation, invention and economy. Econ Soc. 2007;36(4):509–25
Cilliers P. Complexity and postmodernism. New York: Routledge; 1998
Holt T, Thorogood M, Griffiths F. Changing clinical practice through patient specific reminders available at the time of the clinical encounter: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(8):974–84
Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson A, DeCorby K, Bucknall T, Kent B, et al. Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):33
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997
Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review: a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;1:21–34
Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage; 2013
Marchal B, Westhorp G, Wong G, Van Belle S, Greenhalgh T, Kegels G, et al. Realist RCTs of complex interventions—an oxymoron. Soc Sci Med. 2013;94:124–8
Goffman E. Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1963
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Griffiths, F., Goudge, J. (2016). Systematic Reviews: Beyond Cochrane to Complexity. In: Sturmberg, J. (eds) The Value of Systems and Complexity Sciences for Healthcare. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26221-5_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26221-5_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26219-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26221-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)