Kerner Jon, Tajima Kazuo, Yip Cheng-Har, Bhattacharyya Onil, Trapido Ed, Cazap Eduardo, Ullrich Andreas, Fernandez Maria, Qiao You Lin, Kim Paula, Cho Juhee, Sutcliffe Catherine, Sutcliffe Simon
Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Canada E-mail :
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2012;13(4 Suppl):37-48.
Substantial differences in population-based cancer control outcomes exist within and between nations. Optimal outcomes derive from 'what we know', 'what we apply in practice', and 'how complete and compliant is the population uptake of public health and clinical practice change'. This continuum of research (scientific discovery) to practice (application and uptake) to policy impacts the speed and completeness of practice change and is greatly influenced by the ability, opportunity and readiness of countries to implement evidence informed practices and policies through innovative change. Session 4 of the 4th International Cancer Control Congress focused on knowledge exchange through three plenary presentations and five interactive workshop discussions: 1) the role of epidemiological data as a basis for policy formulation; 2) existing global frameworks for cancer control; 3) knowledge exchange as it relates to public health practice and policy; 4) knowledge exchange in relation to primary, community, and specialist cancer care; and 5) the role of public engagement and advocacy in influencing cancer control policy. Common themes emerging from workshop discussions included the recognition of the importance of knowledge exchange processes, constituents and forums as key aspects of preparedness, awareness and readiness to implement public health and clinical practice change. The importance of cultural and contextual differences between nations was identified as a challenge requiring development of tools for generating relevant population/societal data (e.g., projection methodologies applied to population demographics, outcomes and resources, both societal, human and fiscal) and capacity building for facilitating knowledge transfer and exchange between the constituencies engaged in population-based public health practice and clinically based primary care and disease specialty practice exchange (researchers, health practitioners, health administrators, politicians, patients and families, and the private and public sectors). Understanding patient and public engagement advocacy and its role in influencing health and public policy investment priorities emerged as a critical and fundamental aspect of successful implementation of evidence-informed cancer control change.
各国国内以及国与国之间在基于人群的癌症控制成果方面存在显著差异。最佳成果源自“我们所知道的”、“我们在实践中应用的”以及“人群对公共卫生和临床实践变革的接受程度有多全面且依从性如何”。从研究（科学发现）到实践（应用与接受）再到政策的这一连续过程影响着实践变革的速度和完整性，并且很大程度上受到各国通过创新变革实施循证实践和政策的能力、机会和意愿的影响。第四届国际癌症控制大会的第四场会议通过三场全会报告和五场互动式研讨会讨论聚焦于知识交流：1）流行病学数据作为政策制定基础的作用；2）现有的全球癌症控制框架；3）与公共卫生实践和政策相关的知识交流；4）与初级、社区和专科癌症护理相关的知识交流；5）公众参与和宣传在影响癌症控制政策方面的作用。研讨会讨论中出现的共同主题包括认识到知识交流过程、要素和论坛作为准备、意识以及实施公共卫生和临床实践变革意愿的关键方面的重要性。各国之间文化和背景差异的重要性被确定为一项挑战，这需要开发用于生成相关人群/社会数据的工具（例如应用于人口统计学、成果及资源的预测方法，包括社会、人力和财政方面），以及进行能力建设，以促进参与基于人群的公共卫生实践、基于临床的初级护理和疾病专科实践交流的各方（研究人员、卫生从业者、卫生管理人员、政治家、患者及其家庭以及私营和公共部门）之间的知识转移和交流。理解患者和公众参与宣传及其在影响卫生和公共政策投资重点方面的作用，成为成功实施循证癌症控制变革的关键且基本的方面。
