Premium
Researchers' views about priorities for research on alcohol, tobacco and other drugs
Author(s) -
WALSH RAOUL A.,
LOW ALLISON,
SANSONFISHER ROB W.
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
drug and alcohol review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.018
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1465-3362
pISSN - 0959-5236
DOI - 10.1080/09595239800187651
Subject(s) - agency (philosophy) , addiction , public relations , medical research , quality (philosophy) , qualitative research , medical education , psychology , political science , business , medicine , sociology , psychiatry , social science , philosophy , epistemology , pathology
Abstract There have been few attempts to study systematically researchers' views about priorities for addiction research. This mail/telephone survey of 101 Australian researchers achieved a 90% response rate. Respondents believed there should be a 50/50 split between the agency‐directed and researcher‐initiated methods of funding allocation. The top four drugs in terms of desired proportions of research spending were alcohol 32%, tobacco 18%, opiates 9% and prescribed drugs 9%. Researchers' preferences for high funding allocations on prevention research were at odds with the low level of Australian studies in this area. Complexities of design and methodology were nominated as the most important barriers to prevention research. The divide between qualitative and quantitative approaches was not identified as a major barrier to personal or prevention research. In addition to increases in both overall and specific funding, greater collaboration and political support were viewed as important facilitating factors for research efforts. Improved researcher training and the need to integrate research into quality assurance programmes were also nominated as useful means of encouraging prevention studies.