Partnerships between substance abuse researchers and practitioners are being encouraged by numerous initiatives developed in response to a 1998 Institute of Medicine Report (IOM, 1998). The need for the initiatives is clear; however, the structure of the partnerships and how each partner can benefit from them is less clear. There is evidence that each group appreciates the principle of moving research and practice closer together. It is less clear what each group wants from the partnership and what each group can contribute to it. Researchers want to conduct well-controlled studies, with access to clinical populations and adequate control over the study environment to ensure rigorous protocol compliance. Practitioners should be compensated for the time they spend on these projects, and they want to address questions that are of importance to their clinical populations and stay current with new knowledge and technology. No matter how interesting and important these efforts are, unless each group derives adequate and fairly shared benefits, the partnerships will flounder.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rawson et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: