It would be very useful for me (as a sometime trainer in RS) and possibly for the RAMESES core team to see the specific concerns about the methodology - perhaps you might be prepared to share them with us in a bit more detail at another time, or perhaps through a private email (e.g. to Geoff Wong or myself)?
In relation to journals:
Evaluation (European Journal) has published quite a bit of realist evaluation stuff and may stretch to a realist review (might be worth an exploratory email before you submit, asking their views on that!)
I personally favour getting reviews into topic specific journals because I think it will 'spread the word' about the fact that different synthesis methods are 'available and out there'. Not to mention, good examples might help demonstrate how useful the realist approach is!
Others will be better informed than I about specific journals.
From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kelly McShane
Sent: Tuesday, 3 July 2012 10:09 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: journal suggestions: MI for teen health
Just got a manuscript rejected from Health Psychology Review as they did not find the realist method credible (etc, save you the details). The MS examines the use of motivational interviewing to address adolescent health behaviours, using a realist review.
Suggestions for journals? Our team is thinking something European? Not sure if a review journal is within our reach, or if something more topic specific is better.
Kelly McShane, Ph.D., C.Psych.
Department of Psychology
350 Victoria Street
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5B 2K3
Phone: 416-979-5000, ext 2051 (after pressing 1)
Email: [log in to unmask]