Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41050539›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in health services2025

An analysis of National Cancer Institute-funded scale-up research.

Cynthia Vinson, Aubrey Villalobos, Margarita Correa-Mendez, Gila Neta

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in health services, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Cynthia VinsonDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Aubrey VillalobosDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Margarita Correa-MendezDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.
Gila NetaDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The National Cancer Institute seeks to support cancer research to advance scientific knowledge that will "help all people live longer, healthier lives." To do this, we need to understand how to effectively and efficiently scale-up evidence-based cancer control innovations (EBIs). We analyzed National Cancer Institute (NCI)-funded implementation science (IS) grants to understand gaps and opportunities for scale-up research. Methods: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Query, View, and Report (QVR) system was used to identify NCI-funded IS grants focused on scale-up since 2016. Key search terms were identified, and two coders reviewed specific aims to identify IS and scale-up grants. Eligible grants were coded for study characteristics, including administrative, cancer-related, and scale-up related features using Microsoft Excel and iSearch. Results: Of the 61 grants initially identified, 17 were included. Approximately one-third of the grants were conducted abroad ( Conclusions: The NCI has funded a limited number of IS grants focused on scale-up. This analysis helps identify the current scope of the NCI portfolio and enables exploration of gaps and opportunities for future research on scale-up across the cancer continuum.

Indexed as

cancer controlevidence-based innovationsimplementation scienceresearch gapsscale-up

Identifiers

PMID41050539
PMCPMC12491013

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.