Eternity and clinical translation of speech-language pathology research

Abstract

The work we do as clinicians and researchers is forever vulnerable to political trends which can cause dramatic and rapid change in higher education. A current example is the funding of universities according to the value of their research outputs. In comparison to some other domains of health care, the discipline of speech-language pathology is particularly vulnerable to such politics. If we have evolved, we can devolve. The thesis here is that this matter concerns clinicians and clinical researchers, and that both parties need to shore up their relationship to ensure that this discipline has a guaranteed passage into eternity. This can be achieved by sharpening the focus of clinical research and driving its translation into clinical practices. The different and complementary contributions that clinicians and clinical researchers can make to that pursuit are discussed. It is argued that clinicians and clinical researchers can best pursue their necessary relationship with models of spatial cohabitation, and four models are presented for how that might be achieved. The paper concludes with some speculations about alternatives to eternity for the discipline of speech-language pathology.

Keywords:

• Clinicians
• clinical researchers
• clinical translation
• speech-language pathology
• eternity

Notes

^†Invited Elizabeth Usher Memorial Address to the Speech Pathology Australia National Conference, Sydney, May 2007.

In a timely demonstration of the opening premise of this presentation, that we are vulnerable to political trends and whims, the Government of Australia changed shortly after the presentation of this paper. Subsequently, the newly appointed Australian Minister for Industry, Innovation, Science and Research announced that the proposed Research Quality Framework was cancelled and development of a new process with the same name would begin.