Cross-Sectional Survey Analysis of Institutional Research Partnerships in Complementary and Integrative Health: Identifying Barriers and Facilitators

Abstract

Objective:

Collaboration between complementary and integrative health (CIH) institutions and research-intensive (R1) institutions has been successfully undertaken in the United States, resulting in federally funded research projects, educational programs, and faculty development. The aim of this cross-sectional survey study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to establishing and maintaining such collaborative partnerships.

Methods:

A 32-question survey was sent to participants recruited through author contacts and resources, literature review, and database searches. Participants were required to be researchers and affiliates who attempted, completed, or had current collaborative endeavors involving CIH and R1 institutions. Data were collected in the research electronic data capture (REDCap) system and descriptive quantitative and qualitative data analysis was undertaken.

Results:

A total of 26 unique entries were included in the final data analysis; four of which were paired entries (one from an R1 institution and one from a CIH institution) to make up two dyad data collections. Eighty-one percent of the participants had senior leadership roles at CIH institutions representing five CIH disciplines—East Asian medicine (acupuncture and Traditional Chinese Medicine), chiropractic medicine, massage therapy, naturopathy, and yoga. Collaborative research projects were often (>38%) in response to specific project funding mechanisms. Over 60% of the collaborations also included educational activities and faculty development. Collaborations resulted in multiple different types of benefits to both institutions but were not without associated challenges.

Conclusion:

Collaborations between R1 and CIH institutions can be cooperative, productive, and mutually beneficial. Funding mechanisms supporting R1 and CIH collaboration increase CIH research productivity as well as the development of innovative research methodology to study the real-world practice of CIH therapies, whole systems, and whole person health. CIH researchers would greatly benefit from such funding, allowing access to research infrastructure, professional development, and the provision of protected time to conduct research.