ArticleJournal of public health management and practice : JPHMP
What Does a Performance Measurement System Tell Us About the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program?
Article in Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical pharmacy key performance indicators for hospital inpatient setting: a systematic review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Pooled it
- Examining comprehensive cancer control partnerships, plans, and program interventions: successes and lessons learned from a utilization-focused evaluation.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2018Article
- Reliable information for cancer control in Cali, Colombia.Colombia medica (Cali, Colombia) · 2018Article
- Comprehensive Cancer Control Partners' Use of and Attitudes About Evidence-Based Practices.Preventing chronic disease · 2015Article
- Promoting public health through state cancer control plans: a review of capacity and sustainability.Frontiers in public health · 2015Article
- Success Rates for the Objectives of US State Cancer Control Plans: A First Look.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextThe National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) performance measurement system seeks to understand both the processes that funded programs undertake with their respective coalitions to implement the objectives of their cancer plans and the outcomes of those efforts.
objectiveTo identify areas of achievement and technical assistance needs of NCCCP awardees.
designProgram performance was assessed through surveys completed by program directors on performance indicators in 2009 and 2010 and queries from a Web-based management information system in 2011 and 2012.
settingPrograms funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's NCCCP.
participantsSixty-nine programs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The key performance measures assessed were inclusion of diverse partners and key sectors in cancer coalitions, partners' involvement in activities, receiving in-kind resources from partners, using evidence-based interventions and data for setting priorities, conducting program evaluation, using community- or organization-level strategies to address cancer control efforts, and demonstrating progress toward achieving health outcomes.
resultsMost programs reported having active coalitions that represent diverse organizational sectors. Nearly all programs routinely assess the burden of cancer. In-kind resources to implement activities peaked at $64 716 in the second year of a 5-year funding cycle and declined in subsequent project years. By year 3, more than 70% of programs reported having an evaluation plan. While programs reported that nearly two-thirds of their interventions were evidence-based, some programs implemented non-evidence-based interventions. A majority of programs successfully used at least 1 community- or organization-level change strategy. However, many programs did not incorporate objectives linked to health outcomes as they reported progress in implementing interventions.
conclusionsWhile NCCCP programs were strong at building and maintaining infrastructure, some programs may need additional technical assistance to increase the adoption of evidence-based interventions, develop solid and responsive evaluation plans, and better link efforts to population-based measures that demonstrate impact toward reducing the burden of cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.