{"doi":"10.1111/add.16190","title":"Commentary on Nowakowski <i>et al</i>.: Bringing the participants’ own words into addictions research—a win–win for patients and investigators","abstract":"Bringing the participant’s own words into the design of clinical investigations, such as with qualitative and mixed methodologies, should be prioritized in addictions research across the translational science spectrum. Nowakowski et al. present an elegant example of a mixed-methods investigation aimed to achieve a comprehensive, multi-dimensional assessment of patient and provider perspectives regarding obstetric pain management for pregnant people with opioid use disorder (OUD) [1]. Their study’s unique design is an inspiring example of how to maintain rigor in research while also ensuring findings are grounded in stakeholder experiences. Nowakowski et al.’s simultaneous use of a prospective design and mixed methodology attained a robust understanding of the complexities underlying their patients’ overlaying trajectories throughout the perinatal period, delivery pain management, addiction treatment and recovery, each within their individual socio-cultural contexts. Addiction researchers should be encouraged to integrate qualitative methods into their investigations, from medication development to implementation trials, to ensure the prioritization of clinical applicability and equity throughout the translational science spectrum. Mixed-methods designs can be a powerful research tool in areas where immense complexities exist, such as in addiction, from its disease pathogenesis to evaluation of its treatments [2-4]. Nowakowski et al. match the stated rationale for their study’s aims and design with (a) the need for more ‘evidence on patient-centered priorities specifically for pain management in pregnant people with OUD [1]’, (b) existing conflicting evidence regarding the OUD treatment patient’s experience of pain and (c) the need for prospective studies to reflect the longitudinal nature of patients’ trajectories throughout recovery and other life-course events. This intentionality to directly target these complexities in their study, rather than to simplify or ‘control’ for them, allowed their data to identify important gaps (e.g. discrepancies between patient and provider perspectives on adequacy of currently available pain management options) that, if not addressed in subsequent investigations, would inhibit successful translation of their findings into clinical practice. Unfortunately, too often in addictions research, the gathering of stakeholder perspectives in their own words is not endorsed as a strength; it is time to shift this paradigm to promote grounding all stages of clinical research in the patient experience [5]. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods is especially important to consider in studies focused upon communities with intersecting social identities, such as those related to gender, race, ethnicity and being in recovery. Employing an intersectionality approach is critical to promote equity, yet it is commonly not prioritized in addictions biomedical research. Like other investigations focused upon addiction treatment and recovery throughout pregnancy and parenting [3, 6-12], Nowakowski et al. did not restrict their participants to share their insights to only measurements and instruments selected by the investigators. Resultantly, their qualitative data eloquently extended their survey data to provide findings with more depth and breadth than a unidimensional quantitative data study would have otherwise achieved. For example, their combined data highlighted not only individual-level factors impacting pain management, but also ‘systematic and health-care-based barriers to achieving pain relief [1]’, revealing promising new opportunities for intervention. Historically, the socio-cultural context in which our patients live has been largely ignored in clinical investigations despite the additional dimensions that intersecting identities (e.g. parent, Black) bring to the already complex experience of addiction treatment and recovery [13]. Nowakowski et al. provide an illustrative example of how to p","journal":"Addiction","year":2023,"id":394378,"datarank":0.0,"base_score":0.0,"endowment":0.0,"self_citation_contribution":0.0,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.0,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":3,"citer_count":0,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":false,"is_dataset_confidence":0.9486,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":true,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":"2023-01-01","fair_score":null,"fair_percentile":null,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":440142,"name":"Caitlin E. Martin","orcid":"0000-0001-5560-458X","position":0,"is_corresponding":true}],"reference_count":16,"raw_metadata":null,"created_at":"2026-07-19T01:19:14.590635Z","pmid":"36987854","pmcid":null,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":null,"fair_a":null,"fair_i":null,"fair_r":null,"fair_zscore":null,"fair_rationale":null,"fair_model":null,"fair_agent_version":null,"fair_fulltext_source":null,"fair_has_llm":null,"fair_computed_at":null,"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}