Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39540109›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2024

Rethinking our future: Describing and enhancing the impacts of dissemination and implementation science for cancer prevention and control.

Vianca Cuevas Soulette, Karen M Emmons, Douglas A Luke, Peg Allen, Bobbi J Carothers, Ross C Brownson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2024. 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. Impacts of pragmatic implementation science in a primary care laboratory.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Vianca Cuevas SoulettePrevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis., St. Louis. MI, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5523-7058
Karen M EmmonsDepartment of Social and Behavioral Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0685-6446
Douglas A LukeCenter for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis., St. Louis. MI, USA.
Peg AllenPrevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis., St. Louis. MI, USA.
Bobbi J CarothersCenter for Public Health Systems Science, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis., St. Louis. MI, USA.
Ross C BrownsonPrevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis., St. Louis. MI, USA.

Funding

Washington University Center for Diabetes Translation Research P30DK092950 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Ross C Brownson, Debra Haire-Joshu · 2011 to 2026
$11.7M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092950
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Researchers generally do an excellent job tracking the scientific impacts of their scholarship in ways that are relevant for academia (e.g., publications, grants) but too often neglect to focus on broader impacts on population health and equity. The National Cancer Institute's Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) includes 7 P50 Centers that are interested in broad measures of impact. We provide an overview of the approach underway within the ISC3 consortium to identify health and social impacts. Methods: ISC3 adapted and applied the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM) to identify the impact on the discipline of D&I science and to consider dissemination and implementation (D&I) impacts in the four original TSBM domains: (1) clinical; (2) community; (3) economic; and (4) policy. To collect data from all Centers, we: (1) co-developed a set of detailed impact indicators with examples; (2) created a data collection template; and (3) summarized the impact data from each center. Results: Based on data from 48 ISC3 pilot studies, cores, or consortium activities, we identified 84 distinct benefits. The most common impacts were shown for implementation science (43%), community (28%), and clinical (18%). Frequent audiences included primary care providers, public health practitioners, and community partners. ISC3 members highlighted the need for product feedback, and storytelling assistance to advance impact. Conclusions: The ISC3 consortium is using a participatory approach to successfully apply the TSBM, thus seeking to maximize the real-world impacts of D&I science. The D&I field needs to prioritize ways to more fully document and communicate societal impacts.

Indexed as

Cancer controldissemination and implementation researchimpacttranslational benefitstranslational science

Identifiers

PMID39540109
PMCPMC11557277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.