ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2015
The Activities and Impact of State Programs to Address Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, 2011-2014.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Collaborating with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program to Increase Receipt of Ovarian Cancer Care from a Gynecologic Oncologist.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2022Article
- Article
- Implementing Cancer Genomics in State Health Agencies: Mapping Activities to an Implementation Science Outcome Framework.Public health genomics · 2020Article
- Blending Insights from Implementation Science and the Social Sciences to Mitigate Inequities in Screening for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Evaluating the role of public health in implementation of genomics-related recommendations: a case study of hereditary cancers using the CDC Science Impact Framework.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019Review
- From public health genomics to precision public health: a 20-year journey.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2018Review
- BRCA Genetic Testing and Receipt of Preventive Interventions Among Women Aged 18-64 Years with Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Areas - United States, 2009-2014.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2017Article
- Genomics in Public Health: Perspective from the Office of Public Health Genomics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015Article
- Moving the Needle on Action Around Evidence-Based Screening for Hereditary Conditions: Preparing State Chronic Disease Directors to Advance Precision Public Health.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
- A Scoping Review of Personalized, Interactive, Web-Based Clinical Decision Tools Available for Breast Cancer Prevention and Screening in the United States.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2011, the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC), at the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), released a three-year funding opportunity announcement (FOA) for a competitive, non-research cooperative agreement. The agreement enhanced the capacities of state health departments to promote the application of best practices for evidence-based breast cancer genomics through education, surveillance, and policy activities. The FOA required that applicants focus on activities related to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). The DCPC funded three states: Georgia, Michigan, and Oregon. Georgia was a first-time recipient of cancer genomics funding, whereas Michigan and Oregon had long standing activities in cancer genomics and had received CDC funding in the past. By the end of the funding period, each state had well-functioning and impactful state-based programs in breast cancer genomics. This article highlights the impact of a few key state activities by using CDC's Science Impact Framework. There were challenges to implementing public health genomics programs, including the need to develop relevant partnerships, the highly technical nature of the subject matter, a lack of genetic services in certain areas, and the difficulty in funding genetic services. Georgia, Michigan, and Oregon have served as models for others interested in initiating or expanding cancer genomics programs, and they helped to determine what works well for promoting and integrating public health genomics into existing systems.
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.