↓ Skip to main content

Realist explanatory theory building method for social epidemiology: a protocol for a mixed method multilevel study of neighbourhood context and postnatal depression

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
246 Mendeley
Title
Realist explanatory theory building method for social epidemiology: a protocol for a mixed method multilevel study of neighbourhood context and postnatal depression
Published in
SpringerPlus, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-3-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

John G Eastwood, Bin B Jalaludin, Lynn A Kemp

Abstract

A recent criticism of social epidemiological studies, and multi-level studies in particular has been a paucity of theory. We will present here the protocol for a study that aims to build a theory of the social epidemiology of maternal depression. We use a critical realist approach which is trans-disciplinary, encompassing both quantitative and qualitative traditions, and that assumes both ontological and hierarchical stratification of reality. We describe a critical realist Explanatory Theory Building Method comprising of an: 1) emergent phase, 2) construction phase, and 3) confirmatory phase. A concurrent triangulated mixed method multilevel cross-sectional study design is described. The Emergent Phase uses: interviews, focus groups, exploratory data analysis, exploratory factor analysis, regression, and multilevel Bayesian spatial data analysis to detect and describe phenomena. Abductive and retroductive reasoning will be applied to: categorical principal component analysis, exploratory factor analysis, regression, coding of concepts and categories, constant comparative analysis, drawing of conceptual networks, and situational analysis to generate theoretical concepts. The Theory Construction Phase will include: 1) defining stratified levels; 2) analytic resolution; 3) abductive reasoning; 4) comparative analysis (triangulation); 5) retroduction; 6) postulate and proposition development; 7) comparison and assessment of theories; and 8) conceptual frameworks and model development. The strength of the critical realist methodology described is the extent to which this paradigm is able to support the epistemological, ontological, axiological, methodological and rhetorical positions of both quantitative and qualitative research in the field of social epidemiology. The extensive multilevel Bayesian studies, intensive qualitative studies, latent variable theory, abductive triangulation, and Inference to Best Explanation provide a strong foundation for Theory Construction. The study will contribute to defining the role that realism and mixed methods can play in explaining the social determinants and developmental origins of health and disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 246 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Unknown 241 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 24%
Student > Master 39 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 12%
Researcher 21 9%
Other 14 6%
Other 47 19%
Unknown 37 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 54 22%
Business, Management and Accounting 37 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 8%
Psychology 15 6%
Other 57 23%
Unknown 43 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,127,785
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#449
of 1,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,880
of 304,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#21
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 304,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.