A CM intervention for alcohol use disorders should be in alignment with existing cultural and community practices such as alcohol abstinence, is more likely to be successful when Elders and community leaders are champions of the intervention, the intervention is compatible with counseling or treatment methodologies, and the intervention provides rewards that are both culturally specific and practical.

Precision medicine initiatives, such as Cancer Breakthrough 2020, promise to improve cancer outcomes by tailoring treatment to an individual's genes, environment, and lifestyle. This promise will fall short unless researchers successfully engage diverse communities, including those with histories of medical and research abuse. We examined a rural Alaska Native community's viewpoints about biospecimen collection and storage; interest and recall in reporting family health history; and interest and engagement in biospecimen collection for conducting a genetic test for cancer. In 2014, four focus groups were held with 28 adult Alaska Native rural community members. Thematic analysis was performed after establishing a coding scheme by team consensus. Study participants shared interest in engaging in genetic cancer research and suggested ways to improve community engagement in research. These included transparency and continuous communication with researchers at all stages of the research, clear communication about the intent of the research, and that research and results take into consideration the community's needs. These suggestions may be beneficial for future efforts to expand precision medicine research in Alaska Native communities and similar, diverse populations.

and Alaska Native communities are disproportionately affected by problems with alcohol use and seek culturally appropriate and effective interventions for individuals with alcohol use disorders.OBJECTIVE To determine whether a culturally tailored contingency management intervention, in which incentives were offered for biologically verified alcohol abstinence, resulted in increased abstinence among American Indian and Alaska Native adults. This study hypothesized that adults assigned to receive a contingency management intervention would have higher levels of alcohol abstinence than those assigned to the control condition. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis multisite randomized clinical trial, the Helping Our Native Ongoing Recovery (HONOR) study, included a 1-month observation period before randomization and a 3-month intervention period. The study was conducted at 3 American Indian and Alaska Native health care organizations located in Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and the

AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE MENTAL HEALTH RESEARCH i FOREWORDWe are delighted to showcase a unique process for reaching out to, engaging, and disseminating research conducted among Alaska Native people. The Southcentral Foundation, notably its Research Department, led by Dr. Denise Dillard and her colleagues -the authors of this special issue − is widely respected for its deep commitment to pursuing research relevant to its customer/owners. Indeed, simply referring to their patient population in this fashion underscores the alignment of their mission, values, and actions. Frankly, I know of no other entity, tribal or otherwise, so fully dedicated in principal as well as practice to ensuring that its research is driven by stakeholders, that the results are translated into terms meaningful to them, that the findings reflect their perspectives, that the attendant insights are applied with local benefit, and that this work is undertaken in a scientifically rigorous manner that contributes to our understanding of the health and well-being of this special population. The articles herein testify to the effort required of such work and the potential return on investment for all participants.Unfortunately, much of today's conversation about outreach to, engagement of, and dissemination among Native communities proceeds at a level of abstraction that offers little guidance about actual process. Not so here. The authors describe in detail the nature of their research, steps taken to communicate findings to key stakeholders, the latter's reactions, and implications for this process. Their candid discussion of the challenges that arose during this endeavor represents a refreshingly authentic analysis of a difficult subject, the mechanics of which are often glossed over in the rush to exhort others to engage tribal communities. Of particular value is the authors' reflection on how the communication strategies available to them through the Southcentral Foundation can be mobilized to maintain the momentum of their initial efforts and to reinforce the reciprocity as well as transparency that characterized this undertaking. The lessons learned, and shared in the pages to follow, are important ones. Thank you for stretching yourselves beyond the typical role of researcher-as-scientist to illustrate these lessons and the wisdom contained therein. Beyond this introduction, the special issue consists of three sections. Section I describes the background information shared with Forum attendees, the structure and content of the Forum itself, and the methods used to gather community feedback. Section II depicts three SCF research studies that disseminated results differently, along with community feedback about clarity of results, sufficiency of information, and the degree to which information was presented in an interesting way. The three research studies concern dissemination of results from a T-SBIRT (i.e., trauma-focused screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment) process, a stakeholder-driven decision support to...

No abstract