Principles of Industry-Academic Partnerships Informed by Digital Mental Health Collaboration: Mixed Methods Study.

Abstract

Background: Cross-sector collaboration is increasingly recognized as essential for addressing complex health challenges, including those in mental health. Industry-academic partnerships play a vital role in advancing research and developing health solutions, yet differing priorities and perspectives can make collaboration complex.

Objective: This study aimed to identify key principles to support effective industry-academic partnerships, from the perspective of industry partners, and develop this into actionable guidance, which can be applied across sectors. Mental health served as a motivating example due to its urgent public health relevance and the growing role of digital innovation.

Methods: Using a 3-stage, mixed-methods approach, we conducted a web-based survey of UK-based digital mental health companies (N=22) to identify key barriers and facilitators to industry-academic partnerships. This was followed by 2 focus groups (n=5) that explored emerging themes from the survey using thematic analysis. Finally, we conducted a workshop with industry representatives, researchers, clinicians, and PPI members to co-develop the Principles of Industry-Academic Partnerships (PIP) guidance.

Results: Survey findings highlighted that industry partners valued academic collaboration for enhancing credibility, facilitating knowledge transfer, and gaining access to PPI networks. However, key barriers included high costs, slow academic timelines, and complex contracting processes. The 4 major themes that emerged from the focus groups were: advantages of collaboration, cultural differences between organizations, collaboration models, and structural barriers within universities. Through informed discussions in the workshop, these themes were explored, leading to the development of 14 actionable strategies. These strategies reflect industry perspectives and formed the PIP guidance, categorized under project initiation, defining the scope and agreements, project execution, and promoting sustainability.

Conclusions: The PIP guidance provides a practical framework to support more effective and mutually beneficial collaborations between industry and academia. Developed through the lens of mental health research, the strategies identified are broadly applicable across disciplines where cross-sector partnerships are essential. Industry partners valued academic collaborations for their credibility and scientific rigor, but highlighted persistent structural and cultural barriers within universities. Addressing these challenges by aligning expectations and timelines, adopting flexible collaboration models, and streamlining operational processes can help foster impactful and sustainable partnerships in mental health and beyond.