Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41965810›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026

Method to engage invested partners to co-create feasible and sustainable approaches to design and implement cancer prevention and control tools.

M Pérez Jolles, R E Glasgow, R Gomes, A G Huebschmann, E R Kessler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

M Pérez JollesDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA. monica.jolles@cuanschutz.edu.
R E GlasgowAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
R GomesAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
A G Huebschmann *Adult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
E R Kessler *Division of Medical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.

Funding

University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant - Lung Cancer Patient-Derived Xenografts with Autologous Human Immune SystemsP30CA046934 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI James V Degregori · 1988 to 2026
$117.0M
TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH COREP30DK092923 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Angela Gwen Brega · 2011 to 2026
$10.2M
Pragmatic Implementation Science Approaches to Assess and Enhance Value of Cancer Prevention and Control in Rural Primary CareP50CA244688 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI GLASGOW, RUSSELL E · 2019 to 2023
$4.9M
Partnering with primary care to address Whole Person Health goals for cancer prevention - representative health benefits to patients and value and sustainment for clinicsR01CA282292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI RUSSELL E GLASGOW, Amy Grotelueschen Huebschmann · 2024 to 2026
$2.0M
Cancer Center, University of Colorado 3P30CA046934Cancer Center, University of Colorado P50CA244688Center for American Indian and Alaska Native Diabetes Translation Research 5P30DK092923-13NCI NIH HHS P30 CA046934NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244688NCI NIH HHS R01 CA282292NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092923
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA core tenet of implementation science is early planning for implementation with invested partners. For health systems, aligning workflows and strategies to the local context and ensuring that the intervention's change mechanism meets local priorities are critical for successful implementation. This paper describes a participatory engagement method to design and adapt cancer prevention and control tools (interventions) to promote whole-health and aligned workflows and strategies, focusing on health equity, termed Co-creation for health equity (CO-4 Health Equity). We illustrate this novel method with primary care (prevention) and oncology (treatment) case examples.

methodsThe CO-4 Health Equity method included a set of parallel online workshop sessions with clinic providers/staff and patient partners. This method is guided by the Core Functions and Forms approach to the implementation of complex interventions. That is, we actively worked with partners to co-create clinical workflows and other activities (i.e.,. the intervention's forms) that were tailored to clinical contexts, while preserving the intervention's core function(s), linked to how the intervention brings about change. Through four to five sessions, participants identified and refined the intervention's core purposes (functions) to ensure alignment with clinic priorities. Sessions focused on refining and adapting concrete forms (how) to meet those functions, such as clinical workflows and implementation strategies. We used similar co-creation methods in primary care and oncology settings.

resultsIn primary care and oncology, patients and clinical partners with diverse roles across clinics (e.g., clinicians, nurses, care managers, medical assistants, operations leaders, and electronic medical records informaticists) participated in 45-90-minute co-creation workshops. Sessions with clinic partners (n = 13 primary care partners; n = 15 oncology partners) and patients (n = 5 primary care patients; n = 7 oncology patients) were held separately and included summaries of patient recommendations and vice versa. Sessions focused on: (1) refining the core goals of each tool (e.g., identifying patients' priority cancer risk factors); (2) refining and adapting the workflows and strategies for intervention delivery; (3) user testing of tool prototypes; and (4) consensus-building on options for clinical workflows. We used iPRISM webtool for implementation planning, and developed matrices to track actions taken in response to partner recommendations.

conclusionsThis CO-4 Health Equity methodology leverages input from invested partners to refine and adapt workflows and strategies for implementing cancer prevention and control tools in primary care and oncology settings. Future directions include further testing this participatory methodology and applying it to other clinical innovations to increase health equity.

Indexed as

Co-creationEngagementEquityHealth risk appraisalPatient-centered careUser testingWeb tool

Identifiers

PMID41965810
PMCPMC13112691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.