Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35842850›Full record

ReviewCancer causes & control : CCC2022

Building implementation science capacity among practitioners of cancer control: development of a pilot training curriculum.

Joseph A Astorino, Sarah Kerch, Mandi L Pratt-Chapman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Joseph A AstorinoThe George Washington University Cancer Center, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, D.C, United States of America. jastorino@gwu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0248-4016
Sarah KerchThe George Washington University Cancer Center, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, D.C, United States of America.
Mandi L Pratt-ChapmanThe George Washington University Cancer Center, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, D.C, United States of America.

Funding

ENHANCE NATL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CONTROL U38DP004972 · DP · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI CHAPMAN, MANDI PRATT · 2013 to 2014
$849k
CDC HHS #NU58DP006461-03NCCDPHP CDC HHS U38 DP004972
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCancer control interventions are difficult to implement with fidelity, while tailoring to fit contexts. Engaged approaches are suggested to advance equity. On-the-ground practitioners are needed to serve as collaborators in the implementation process with research teams, but few trainings are designed with them in mind.

methodsThe Cancer Control Implementation Science Base Camp (CCISBC) was created to improve capacity among cancer control practitioners when implementing evidence-based cancer screening programs in specific contexts. Development of the curriculum included the following: (1) performing a literature review assessing extant curricula, (2) comparing competencies of these curricula, (3) user-centered design, (4) producing learning materials, (5) recruiting two teams to test a pilot, (6) running the pilot, and (7) evaluating results.

resultsNine competencies overlapped between four of the curricula scanned in this study, all of which served as the basis for learning objectives. Principles that emerged from design sessions included staying clear about terminology, supporting the brokerage of knowledge, reframing theories, models, and frameworks as tools, and including equity in everything. Pilot testing showed that the average learner increased 74.5% in knowledge and 75% in confidence regarding implementing evidence-based cancer screening. Evidence suggests that the training increased the skill of implementing evidence-based interventions (EBIs) with a health equity lens.

conclusionIn order to scale practice-based evidence, practitioners will need to be engaged. This engagement is optimized when practitioners are trained to collaborate on implementation research. The CCISBC is a feasible program to develop capacity among practitioners in comprehensive cancer control in order to optimize EBIs tailored to context.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceNeoplasmsCurriculumEarly Detection of CancerHumansCancer screeningCapacity buildingComprehensive cancer control practitionersHealth equityImplementation scienceTraining

Identifiers

PMID35842850
PMCPMC9534372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.