literature, several models are described here and in the following chapters that could help to bridge the gaps among stakeholders in this field:
The knowledge base on technology transfer has grown rapidly in the last fifteen years. By one estimate the citations in this field exceeded 10,000 by 1995.1 Experts make several distinctions that are useful in considering how to close the gaps between research, treatment, and policy in the drug-abuse area. They distinguish between technology transfer that is "hard" (e.g., equipment) and "soft" (e.g., counseling methods), and between technologies that are "high" (requiring substantial capital) and "low" (requiring relatively little investment). They differentiate between ''embodied" technologies (involving a physical entity like a new drug) and "disembodied" technologies (e.g., a new counseling procedure) (Backer, 1991). Technology experts also distinguish between "information dissemination" activities (e.g., information clearinghouses) and "knowledge utilization" activities that provide assistance in adoption efforts after information is available.
A recent Institute of Medicine report (IOM, 1994) makes another use-