But is It Hermeneutic Enough?: Reading for Methodological Salience in a Scoping Review of Hermeneutics and Implementation Science

Abstract

Hermeneutic methods have been widely used in health research. Through conducting a scoping review of hermeneutic studies related to implementation in healthcare, we identified various approaches and common strengths across studies. The review was part of a larger study exploring how hermeneutics could contribute fresh perspectives to implementation science. We looked at a large number of studies that reported some use of hermeneutics with a focus on what they had to say about processes of implementation in health care environments. While meeting our primary goal of identifying what was salient to implementation, we came up against the question of what made for a strong hermeneutic study. Through an extensive process of evaluation and discussion, several common elements emerged across studies that used hermeneutics: participatory conversations, reflective spaces, attention to alterity, and close-up granular detail. In this article, we outline the review process, then focus on six articles that met our criteria for relevance to implementation and hermeneutic strength. We discuss how some or all the common elements appeared in the articles, despite wide variations in topic and in how hermeneutics was applied. We argue that strength in hermeneutic research stems from a dialectic between applied principles and outcomes.