Steele C Brooke, Rose John M, Townsend Julie S, Fonseka Jamila, Richardson Lisa C, Chovnick Gary
Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway NE, Mail Stop F-76, Chamblee Building No. 107, 4th Floor, Atlanta, GA 30341. Email:
Health and Analytics, Battelle Memorial Institute, Arlington, Virginia, and Seattle, Washington.
Prev Chronic Dis. 2015 Jul 16;12:E113. doi: 10.5888/pcd12.150095.
National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) awardees are encouraged to work with partners (eg, nonprofit organizations) to develop and implement plans to reduce the cancer burden in their jurisdictions using evidence-based practices (EBPs). However, the extent of EBP use among awardees and their partners is not well understood.
From March through July 2012, we conducted a web-based survey of program partners referred by NCCCP program directors who were involved in implementation of cancer control plans.
Approximately 53% of referred partners (n = 83) completed surveys, 91.6% of whom represented organizations. Most partners reported involvement in helping to identify (80.5%), adapt (81.7%), implement (90.4%), and evaluate (81.9%) EBPs. The factors rated most frequently as very important when selecting EBPs were "consistent with our organization's mission" (89.2%) and "cost-effective" (81.9%). Although most respondents said that their organizations understood the importance of using EBPs (84.3%) and had adequate access to cancer registry data (74.7%), few reported having sufficient financial resources to develop new EBPs (7.9%). The most frequently mentioned benefit of using EBPs was that they are proven to work. Resource limitations and difficulty adapting EBPs for specific populations and settings were challenges.
Our findings help indicate how NCCCP partners are involved in using EBPs and can guide ongoing efforts to encourage the use of EBPs for cancer control. The challenges of using EBPs that partners identified highlight the need to improve strategies to translate cancer prevention and control research into practice in real-world settings and for diverse populations.
国家综合癌症控制计划(NCCCP)的受奖者被鼓励与合作伙伴(如非营利组织)合作,利用循证实践(EBP)制定并实施计划,以减轻其辖区内的癌症负担。然而,受奖者及其合作伙伴使用循证实践的程度尚不清楚。
2012年3月至7月,我们对由参与癌症控制计划实施的NCCCP项目主任推荐的项目合作伙伴进行了一项基于网络的调查。
约53%的被推荐合作伙伴(n = 83)完成了调查,其中91.6%代表组织。大多数合作伙伴报告参与了帮助识别(80.5%)、调整(81.7%)、实施(90.4%)和评估(81.9%)循证实践。在选择循证实践时,最常被评为非常重要的因素是“与我们组织的使命一致”(89.2%)和“具有成本效益”(81.9%)。虽然大多数受访者表示他们的组织理解使用循证实践的重要性(84.3%),并且能够充分获取癌症登记数据(74.7%),但很少有人报告有足够的财政资源来开发新的循证实践(7.9%)。使用循证实践最常提到的好处是它们已被证明有效。资源限制以及将循证实践调整以适用于特定人群和环境的困难是挑战。
我们的研究结果有助于表明NCCCP合作伙伴如何参与使用循证实践,并可指导当前鼓励将循证实践用于癌症控制的努力。合作伙伴所指出的使用循证实践的挑战凸显了改进策略的必要性,以便在现实环境中针对不同人群将癌症预防和控制研究转化为实践。