4.6 Article

The science of recovery capital: where do we go from here?

期刊

ADDICTION
卷 117, 期 4, 页码 1139-1145

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/add.15732

关键词

Continuity of care; evaluation; measurement; recovery; recovery capital; strengths-based approaches

资金

  1. Economic and Social Research Council [2021-0527]
  2. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [K01 AA028536-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The concept of recovery capital has become important in addiction recovery studies, but there is still insufficient clarity in key domains, factors, and best practice research and applications. More rigorous and systematic conceptual and empirical development is needed to advance the science of recovery capital.
Background The concept of recovery capital (RC) has emerged in studies and discussions of the addiction recovery process and as a potential metric and marker for recovery gains. Although conceptual and applied development of the concept in the 20 years since the term was coined has increased, there remains insufficient clarity of key domains, factors and best practice research and applications for populations experiencing addiction. We aimed to review progress around the conceptualisation and operationalisation of RC and to consider future directions for a science of recovery capital. Method We provided a brief overview of theoretical foundations and advances, empirical measurement and application in treatment and continuing care settings. We next introduced four primary areas for addiction science to address, namely: (i) conceptual development (e.g. how RC domains are unique, but interrelated entities, valence of RC), (ii) empirical testing, adequacy of measurement and analysis, (iii) directions for novel application in treatment and recovery settings and (iv) dissemination and communication to policy, practice and lived experience groups. In this review, we also focussed on some of the challenges that must be addressed for a science of RC, which could produce long-term impact in treatment and policy. Results Despite burgeoning empirical work on RC, its application and translation has been unsystematic. The field currently relies on self-report questionnaires for the development of the theory and quantification of RC. Therefore, there is an urgent need for rigorous and systematic conceptual and empirical development of RC. Conclusions A formal collaboration between scholars, practitioners and experts by experience worldwide would move recovery capital forward in an empirically driven and culturally appropriate manner, as would testing its applicability at individual, organisational and societal levels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据