Delivering the ‘H’ in NHMRC: the case for implementation research in mental health

In their editorial, ‘Funding the ‘H’ in NHMRC’, Baum and colleagues make a strong case for the value of public health and social determinants research, and the need for increased funding in this domain. 1 In particular, the authors highlight a key issue with which we wholeheartedly agree: the ‘tendency for certain methodologies to be privileged over others’, which often results in meaningful and practical research being sidelined. This paper supports and extends Baum et al.’s commentary on the favouring of certain methodologies by drawing attention to another important area typically overlooked by funding bodies: implementation research. This is particularly true in the field of mental health. In this commentary, we draw attention to the dearth of translational research in mental health, and suggest that Australia is lagging behind in its approach to implementation science. Further, with regards to academic versus ‘real-world’ impact, we question whether funders of mental health research have the balance right. Bridging the quality chasm