scholarly journals An Informatics Infrastructure to Catalyze Cancer Control Research and Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johnie Rose ◽  
Weichuan Dong ◽  
Uriel Kim ◽  
Joseph Hnath ◽  
Abby Statler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Community Outreach ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Cancer Data ◽  
Informatics Infrastructure ◽  
Control Research ◽  
Multi Level

Abstract PurposeA disconnect often exists between those with the expertise to manage and analyze complex, multi-source data sets, and the clinical, social services, advocacy, and public health professionals who can pose the most relevant questions and best apply the answers. We describe development and implementation of a cancer informatics infrastructure aimed at broadening the usability of community cancer data to inform cancer control research and practice; and we share lessons learned. MethodsWe built a multi-level database known as The Ohio Cancer Assessment and Surveillance Engine (OH-CASE) to link data from Ohio’s cancer registry with community data from the U.S. Census and other sources. Space- and place-based characteristics were assigned to individuals according to residential address. Stakeholder input informed development of an interface for generating queries based on geographic, demographic, and disease inputs and for outputting results aggregated at the state, county, municipality, or zip code levels. ResultsOH-CASE contains 723,410 patient records for Ohioans diagnosed with cancer from 1/1/2006 – 12/31/2017 across 88 counties containing 1215 municipalities and 1197 zip codes. Stakeholder feedback from cancer center community outreach teams, advocacy organizations, public health, and researchers suggests a broad range of uses of such multi-level data resources accessible via a user interface. ConclusionOH-CASE represents a prototype of a transportable model for curating and synthesizing data to understand cancer burden across communities. Beyond supporting collaborative research, this infrastructure can serve the clinical, social services, public health, and advocacy communities by enabling targeting of outreach, funding, and interventions to narrow cancer disparities.

Cancer control planning

2016 ◽  
pp. 245-255
Author(s):  
Massoud Samiei
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Control Plan ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cancer Data ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
The Impact ◽  
National Cancer Control Plan

Despite all the progress made in cancer research and in the fight against cancer, the disease cannot be completely eradicated in the foreseeable future. A logical public health measure must therefore focus all efforts on preventing and confining the disease, i.e. a systematic and coordinated approach to reduce the impact of cancer on populations. Such an organised approach is called cancer control. It forms part of a holistic and coordinated approach, called a national cancer control plan/ programme (NCCP), involving the public sector, non-governmental organizations, academia, and the private sector. Policy makers and cancer advocacy groups should consider cancer control planning, and its financing and implementation, a public health necessity and not an option. The model proposed here is a hybrid one. The success of cancer control planning depends greatly on the availability and functionality of local cancer data and knowledge, in addition to adequate resources and government commitment.

Evidence-Based Cancer Practices, Programs, and Interventions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria E. Fernandez ◽  
Patricia Dolan Mullen ◽  
Jennifer Leeman ◽  
Timothy J. Walker ◽  
Cam Escoffery
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The Public ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Control Research ◽  
Control And Prevention

There are many evidence-based interventions, cancer control practices, programs, treatments, and clinical practice guidelines across cancer control and prevention topic areas that have great potential for decreasing the cancer burden. Nevertheless, challenges in identifying evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that match the needs of community and practice settings, adapting EBIs for new populations and contexts, and implementing EBIs in real-world settings limit the public health impact of cancer control research and its products. This chapter provides an introduction to existing EBIs for cancer control and provides examples of different types of EBIs across the cancer continuum. It highlights issues related to the identification of EBIs, including the evaluation of EBI resources. It also describes processes that can be used to enhance the development, adaptation, and implementation of evidence-based cancer control interventions.

scholarly journals Building a Comprehensive Cancer Center: Overall Structure

2021 ◽  
pp. 3-13
Author(s):  
Dolores Grosso ◽  
Mahmoud Aljurf ◽  
Usama Gergis
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Community Outreach ◽  
Control Program ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Centers ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Centers ◽  
Private Donations ◽  
Cancer Control Program ◽  
Health Organization

AbstractAccording to the World Health Organization (WHO), cancer is the second leading cause of death globally, accounting for approximately 9.6 million deaths [1]. The WHO recommends that each nation has a national cancer control program (NCCP) to reduce the incidence of cancer and deaths related to cancer, as well as to improve the quality of life of cancer patients [2]. Comprehensive cancer centers form the backbone of a NCCP and are charged with developing innovative approaches to cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment [3]. This is accomplished through basic and clinical research, the provision of patient care, the training of new clinicians and scientists, and community outreach and education. Most comprehensive cancer centers are affiliated with university medical centers, but their cancer care initiatives may involve partnering outside the institution with other comprehensive cancer centers, community leaders, or members of industry [3]. When affiliated with a university medical center, cancer center executives must work in concert with their counterparts at the hospital, patient practice, medical school, and allied health science leaders resulting in an overlapping, often complicated reporting structure. Comprehensive cancer centers and the departments in the center receive funding for their services from various sources, including national and local grants, institutional funds, private donations, and industry [4].

scholarly journals Better Health Durham: Community Engagement in a Cluster RCT of a Prevention Practitioner Intervention in Low-Income Neighbourhoods

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement 2) ◽  
pp. 22s-22s
Author(s):  
M.A. O'Brien ◽  
A. Lofters ◽  
B. Wall ◽  
A.D. Pinto ◽  
R. Elliott ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Community Outreach ◽  
Chronic Disease Prevention ◽  
Cluster Rct

Background: The Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening (BETTER) intervention has improved uptake of chronic disease prevention and screening activities in primary care. The BETTER intervention consists of 1:1 visits between prevention practitioners (PPs) and patients (40-65 years). It is unknown if an adapted BETTER could be effective in the community with public health nurses as PPs. Aim: The presentation objective is to describe community engagement strategies in a cluster RCT in low income neighborhoods with low cancer screening rates and low uptake of primary care. Methods: Principles of community-based participatory research were used to design the community engagement strategy in Durham region, Ontario. Key elements included close collaboration with public health partners to identify stakeholders and creating a community advisory committee (CAC) and a primary care engagement group to provide advice. Results: We identified 15 community stakeholder groups (∼47 subgroups) including service organizations, faith groups, and charitable organizations representing diverse constituents. Community outreach activities included in-person meetings and information displays at local events. The CAC is comprised of members of the public and representatives from primary care, social services, and community organizations. The CAC and primary care engagement groups have provided advice on trial recruitment strategies and on the design of the PP visit. Conclusion: The partnership between public health, primary care, and the study team has been crucial to connect with community stakeholders. Community engagement is essential in raising awareness about the study and will contribute to successful recruitment. Trial Registration: NCT03052959

Comprehensive cancer control-research & development: knowing what we do and doing what we know

2009 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 610-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon F Kerner ◽  
Eduardo Cazap ◽  
Derek Yach ◽  
Marco A Pierotti ◽  
Maria Grazia Daidone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Health Sector ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Control ◽  
The Public ◽  
Control Research

Comprehensive cancer control is defined as an integrated and coordinated approach to reducing cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality across the cancer control continuum from primary prevention to end-of-life care. This approach assumes that when the public sector, non-governmental organizations, academia, and the private sector share with each other their skills, knowledge, and resources, a country can take advantage of all its talents and resources to more quickly reduce the burden of cancer for all its population. One critical issue for comprehensive cancer control is the extent to which the private sector can contribute to cancer prevention and control programs and policies that have historically been lead by the public health sector, and similarly how can the public sector increase its investment and involvement in clinical research and practice issues that are largely driven by the private sector worldwide? In addition, building capacity to integrate research that is appropriate to the culture and context of the population will be important in different settings, in particular research related to cancer control interventions that have the capacity to influence outcomes. To whatever extent cancer control research is ultimately funded through the private and public sectors, if investments in research discoveries are ultimately to benefit the populations that bear the greatest burden of disease, then new approaches to integrating the lessons learned from science with the lessons learned from service (public health, clinical, and public policy) must be found to close the gap between what we know and what we do. Communities of practice for international cancer control, like the ones fostered by the first three International Cancer Control Congresses, represent an important forum for knowledge exchange opportunities to accelerate the translation of new knowledge into action to reduce the burden of cancer worldwide.

“PHONE-CONNECT” - A Pilot Program Prescribing Phones to Address Digital Health Equity Needs in the COVID-19 Era (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gill Kazevman ◽  
Marck Mercado ◽  
Jennifer Hulme ◽  
Andrea Somers
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Access To Health Care ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Contact Tracing ◽  
Health Care Intervention ◽  
Care Intervention

UNSTRUCTURED Vulnerable populations have been identified as having higher infection rates and poorer COVID-19 related outcomes, likely due to their inability to readily access primary care, follow public health directives and adhere to self-isolation guidelines. As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many health care services have adopted new digital solutions, relying on phone and internet connectivity. Yet, persons who are digitally inaccessible, such as those struggling with poverty or homelessness, are often unable to utilize these services. In response to this newly highlighted social disparity known as “digital health inequity”, emergency physicians at the University Health Network, Toronto, initiated a program called “PHONE CONNECT”. This novel approach attempts to improve patients’ access to health care, information and social services, as well as improve their ability to adhere to public health directives (social isolation and contact tracing). While similar programs addressing the same emerging issues have been recently described in the media, this is the first time phones are provided as a health care intervention in an emergency department. This innovative ED point-of-care intervention may have a significant impact on improving the health outcomes for vulnerable people during the COVID-19 pandemic, and even beyond it.

Trends in the incidence and mortality of oral cancer in Nevada (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Foote ◽  
Karl Kingsley
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Oral Cancer ◽  
Cancer Incidence ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Cancer Registries ◽  
Public Health Research ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Incidence And Mortality ◽  
The Us ◽  
Chi Square Analysis

BACKGROUND Reviews of national and state-specific cancer registries have revealed differences in rates of oral cancer incidence and mortality that have implications for public health research and policy. Many significant associations between head and neck (oral) cancers and major risk factors, such as cigarette usage, may be influenced by public health policy such as smoking restrictions and bans – including the Nevada Clean Indoor Act of 2006 (and subsequent modification in 2011). OBJECTIVE Although evaluation of general and regional advances in public policy have been previously evaluated, no recent studies have focused specifically on the changes to the epidemiology of oral cancer incidence and mortality in Nevada. METHODS Cancer incidence and mortality rate data were obtained from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS) Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program. Most recently available rate changes in cancer incidence and mortality for Nevada included the years 2012 – 2016 and are age-adjusted to the year 2000 standard US population. Comparisons of any differences between Nevada and the overall US population were evaluated using Chi square analysis. RESULTS This analysis revealed that the overall rates of incidence and mortality from oral cancer in Nevada differs from that observed in the overall US population. For example, although the incidence of oral cancer among Caucasians is increasing in Nevada and the US overall, it is increasing at nearly twice that rate in Nevada, P=0.0002. In addition, although oral cancer incidence among Minorities in the US is declining, it is increasing in Nevada , P=0.0001. Analysis of reported mortality causes revealed that mortality from oral cancer increased in the US overall but declined in Nevada during the same period (2012-2016). More specifically, mortality among both Males and Females in the US is increasing, but is declining in Nevada, P=0.0027. CONCLUSIONS Analysis of the epidemiologic data from Nevada compared with the overall US revealed significant differences in rates of oral cancer incidence and mortality. More specifically, oral cancer incidence increased in Nevada between 2012-2016 among all groups analyzed (Males, Females, White, Minority), while decreases were observed nationally among Females and Minorities. Although mortality in Nevada decreased over this same time period (in contrast to the national trends), the lag time between diagnosis (incidence) and mortality suggests that these trends will change in the near future. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document