Cameron A J, Brown K S, Cohen R S, Leis A M, Manske S, Olson K, Ritvo P G
National Cancer Institute of Canada.
Cancer Prev Control. 1997 Dec;1(5):361-5.
This paper offers a critique of the National Cancer Institute of Canada's (NCIC) framework for cancer control. The critique has been prepared by researchers who used the framework to review the literature in 5 substantive areas. These reviews, published in the current and previous issues of CPC, were designed to begin to outline a research agenda for the Sociobehavioural Cancer Research Network. In this paper, the authors reflect on the strengths and limitations of the framework. Perceived strengths are that the framework (a) facilitates systematic thinking about research options and priorities, (b) helps foster clear communication, (c) links science and practice, (d) may assist grant review panels to place proposed studies in context and (e) emphasizes important values. Perceived concerns include the following: (a) potential users are not familiar with the framework, (b) lack of clarity of definitions and classification criteria, (c) the utility of the framework is not immediately self-evident to potential users, (d) the framework lacks emphasis on environmental and policy interventions and (e) it is not clear how the values espoused are to be integrated with other dimensions of the framework. The concerns were seen as remediable. In short, the framework was seen to be valuable in its current form; refinement may enhance its value.
本文对加拿大国家癌症研究所（NCIC）的癌症控制框架进行了批判。该批判由研究人员撰写，他们使用该框架对五个实质性领域的文献进行了综述。这些综述发表在《癌症预防与控制》的当期及往期期刊上，旨在初步勾勒社会行为癌症研究网络的研究议程。在本文中，作者反思了该框架的优势与局限。其被认为的优势在于该框架：（a）有助于对研究选项和优先事项进行系统思考；（b）有助于促进清晰的沟通；（c）将科学与实践联系起来；（d）可能有助于资助评审小组将拟议的研究置于相应背景中；（e）强调了重要价值观。察觉到的问题包括：（a）潜在用户对该框架不熟悉；（b）定义和分类标准不够清晰；（c）该框架的实用性对潜在用户而言并非显而易见；（d）该框架缺乏对环境和政策干预的强调；（e）尚不清楚所倡导的价值观将如何与该框架的其他维度相结合。这些问题被认为是可以补救的。简而言之，该框架在当前形式下被视为有价值的；进一步完善可能会提升其价值。
