eprintid: 10059458 rev_number: 24 eprint_status: archive userid: 608 dir: disk0/10/05/94/58 datestamp: 2018-10-31 14:22:24 lastmod: 2021-09-25 23:08:50 status_changed: 2018-10-31 14:22:24 type: article metadata_visibility: show creators_name: Rivas, C creators_name: Vigurs, C title: A realist review of which advocacy interventions work for which abused women under what circumstances: An exemplar ispublished: pub divisions: UCL divisions: B16 divisions: B14 divisions: J81 note: This version is the version of record. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher’s terms and conditions. abstract: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Prototype). The objectives are as follows: To assess advocacy interventions for intimate partner abuse in women, in terms of which interventions work for whom, why and in what circumstances. Our strategic objective reflects our higher-order (realist) question (Greenhalgh 2016), with four more specific descriptive questions as subcomponents and foci in our initial exploration of the data. We will determine all answers (as much as possible) from existing evidence. Research questions How do the key mechanisms associated with the delivery or use of complex interventions that include advocacy as a component interact with contextual influences, and with one another, to explain the successes, failures and partial successes of advocacy as an intervention? What are the active ingredients of advocacy interventions? What are the important moderators or contexts that determine whether the different mechanisms produce their intended outcomes? To what extent do the views and experiences of women who have used advocacy services match the intervention's aims and outcomes? How do organisational and system factors influence implementation of advocacy interventions? These questions may change as the realist review progresses. We will consider active ingredients, impact and outcomes in relation to qualitatively and quantitatively measured effects. Strategic objectives Our strategic objectives are to explain successes, failures, partial successes and small effect sizes in published, empirical studies of advocacy interventions delivered in different settings, and, in particular, to explain mechanisms of effect in heterogeneous, complex, advocacy-containing interventions. This will enable us to make clear decisions on which studies should be aggregated or synthesised in future reviews, as well as how to interpret the evidence in future reviews of advocacy interventions for abused women. It will also enable researchers and developers to design more effective advocacy interventions in the future, determine which outcomes to include, and improve their reporting and evaluation. In addition, it will help policy makers and practitioners to better understand advocacy interventions, and their likely benefit in the local contexts in which they operate. date: 2018-09-28 date_type: published official_url: http://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013135 oa_status: green full_text_type: pub language: eng primo: open primo_central: open_green article_type: review verified: verified_manual elements_id: 1594340 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013135 lyricists_name: Rivas, Carol lyricists_name: Vigurs, Carol lyricists_id: CARIV33 lyricists_id: CVIGU47 actors_name: Bracey, Alan actors_id: ABBRA90 actors_role: owner full_text_status: public publication: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews volume: 2018 number: 9 article_number: CD013135. issn: 1469-493X citation: Rivas, C; Vigurs, C; (2018) A realist review of which advocacy interventions work for which abused women under what circumstances: An exemplar. [Review]. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews , 2018 (9) , Article CD013135.. 10.1002/14651858.CD013135 <https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013135>. Green open access document_url: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10059458/1/Rivas_et_al-2018-Cochrane_Database_of_Systematic_Reviews.pdf