Abstract
Recent attention to closing the research to practice gap reflects a new paradigm in which community partners assume more active roles in intervention research. Funders are shaping this new genre of collaborative research, and yet still require letters of support from investigators documenting access to sites as evidence of feasibility. Defining feasibility by access, however, derives from a basic research model that translates poorly to a collaborative one. At the same time, university-community collaboration within externally funded research poses a number of ethical challenges. We encourage a redefinition of feasibility that prioritizes collaboration by reconstructing the purpose and content of letters of support and by encouraging investigators to build into studies sufficient time and specific plans for building sustainable partnerships.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 125-129 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 2008 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Community collaboration
- Feasibility
- Research-to-practice
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Psychology(all)
- Clinical Psychology
Cite this
Closing the research to practice gap : Redefining feasibility. / Frazier, Stacy L.; Formoso, Diana; Birman, Dina; Atkins, Marc S.
In: Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, Vol. 15, No. 2, 06.2008, p. 125-129.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Closing the research to practice gap
T2 - Redefining feasibility
AU - Frazier, Stacy L.
AU - Formoso, Diana
AU - Birman, Dina
AU - Atkins, Marc S.
PY - 2008/6
Y1 - 2008/6
N2 - Recent attention to closing the research to practice gap reflects a new paradigm in which community partners assume more active roles in intervention research. Funders are shaping this new genre of collaborative research, and yet still require letters of support from investigators documenting access to sites as evidence of feasibility. Defining feasibility by access, however, derives from a basic research model that translates poorly to a collaborative one. At the same time, university-community collaboration within externally funded research poses a number of ethical challenges. We encourage a redefinition of feasibility that prioritizes collaboration by reconstructing the purpose and content of letters of support and by encouraging investigators to build into studies sufficient time and specific plans for building sustainable partnerships.
AB - Recent attention to closing the research to practice gap reflects a new paradigm in which community partners assume more active roles in intervention research. Funders are shaping this new genre of collaborative research, and yet still require letters of support from investigators documenting access to sites as evidence of feasibility. Defining feasibility by access, however, derives from a basic research model that translates poorly to a collaborative one. At the same time, university-community collaboration within externally funded research poses a number of ethical challenges. We encourage a redefinition of feasibility that prioritizes collaboration by reconstructing the purpose and content of letters of support and by encouraging investigators to build into studies sufficient time and specific plans for building sustainable partnerships.
KW - Community collaboration
KW - Feasibility
KW - Research-to-practice
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=44349132832&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=44349132832&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2008.00120.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2008.00120.x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:44349132832
VL - 15
SP - 125
EP - 129
JO - Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
JF - Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
SN - 0969-5893
IS - 2
ER -