A grey literature review of special events for promoting cancer screenings.

BACKGROUND: Cancer remains the second leading cause of mortality in the United States. Special events such as health fairs, screening days or cultural festivals are employed often for community education about cancer screening. A previous systematic review of the published literature was conducted in 2012-2013. The purpose of this study was to conduct a grey literature component of special events that promote breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in the U.S. METHODS: We conducted a grey literature search of dissertations/theses and conference abstracts. The theses/dissertations were restricted to those: 1) written in English, 2) published from January 1990 to December 2011, 3) examined at least one of the predefined categories of special events, 4) involved cancer screening for breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer, 5) included outcome data, and 6) conducted in the United States. A review of U.S. public health and cancer conference abstracts, that were readily available and had focused on at least of 3 cancer types and included outcome data, was conducted. Data were abstracted on the purpose, location, primary audience(s), activities conducted, screening provided onsite or referrals, and evaluation results. RESULTS: The grey literature review found 6 special events. The types of events found added to the numbers found in the systematic review, especially receptions or parties and cultural festivals/events. All focused on increasing breast and cervical cancer screening except one that focused on breast cancer only. The reach of these events was targeted at mostly minorities or underserved communities. Common evidence-based strategies were group education, small media, and reducing structural barriers. Group education involved presentations from physicians, lay-health advisors, or cancer survivors, while reducing structural barriers included activities such as providing screening appointment sign-ups at the event or providing transportation for event participants. Mammogram screening rates ranged from 6.8% to 60% and Pap tests from 52% to 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Further evaluation of special events to promote cancer screening will prove their effectiveness. A grey literature review can augment a systematic review of published literature. Additional data about these events through the grey literature offered additional insights into the goals, intervention components and outcomes of interventions.

A systematic review of special events to promote breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Special events are common community-based strategies for health promotion. This paper presents findings from a systematic literature review on the impact of special events to promote breast, cervical or colorectal cancer education and screening. METHODS: Articles in English that focused on special events involving breast, cervical, and/or colorectal cancer conducted in the U.S. and published between January 1990 and December 2011 were identified from seven databases: Ovid, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstract, Cochrane Libraries, and EconLit. Study inclusion and data extraction were independently validated by two researchers. RESULTS: Of the 20 articles selected for screening out of 1,409, ten articles on special events reported outcome data. Five types of special events were found: health fairs, parties, cultural events, special days, and plays. Many focused on breast cancer only, or in combination with other cancers. Reach ranged from 50-1732 participants. All special events used at least one evidence-based strategy suggested by the Community Guide to Preventive Services, such as small media, one-on-one education, and reducing structural barriers. For cancer screening as an outcome of the events, mammography screening rates ranged from 4.8% to 88%, Pap testing was 3.9%, and clinical breast exams ranged from 9.1% to 100%. For colorectal screening, FOBT ranged from 29.4% to 76%, and sigmoidoscopy was 100% at one event. Outcome measures included intentions to get screened, scheduled appointments, uptake of clinical exams, and participation in cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Special events found in the review varied and used evidence-based strategies. Screening data suggest that some special events can lead to increases in cancer screening, especially if they provide onsite screening services. However, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that special events are effective in increasing cancer screening. The heterogeneity of populations served, event activities, outcome variables assessed, and the reliance on self-report to measure screening limit conclusions. This study highlights the need for further research to determine the effectiveness of special events to increase cancer screening.

A Model for Strengthening Collaborative Research Capacity: Illustrations From the Atlanta Clinical Translational Science Institute.

INTRODUCTION: Community-engaged research is effective in addressing health disparities but may present challenges for both academic institutions and community partners. Therefore, the need to build capacity for conducting collaborative research exists. The purpose of this study is to present a model for building research capacity in academic-community partnerships. METHOD: The Building Collaborative Research Capacity Model was developed as part of the Community Engagement Research Program (CERP) of the Atlanta Clinical and Translational Science Institute (ACTSI). Six domains of collaborative research capacity were identified and used to develop a model. Inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes of building collaborative research capacity are described. RESULTS: To test this model, a competitive request for applications was widely distributed and four community-based organizations were funded to participate in a 2-year program with the aim of conducting a pilot study and submitting a research proposal for funding to National Institutes of Health or another major funding agency. During the first year, the community-based organization partners were trained on conducting collaborative research and matched with an academic partner from an ACTSI institution. Three of the academic-community partnerships submitted pilot study results and two submitted a grant proposal to a national agency. DISCUSSION: The Building Collaborative Research Capacity Model is an innovative approach to strengthening academic-community partnerships. This model will help build needed research capacity, serve as a framework for academicians and community partners, and lead to sustainable partnerships that improve community health.

A review of multicomponent interventions to prevent and control tobacco use among college students.

OBJECTIVE: Multicomponent tobacco control programs have been implemented at the state and community levels and have led to a reduction in tobacco use. The purpose was to review the public health research literature on tobacco prevention and control programs on college campuses and derive evidence-based implications for comprehensive program implementation. METHODS: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC, and PubMed databases were used to search the research literature concerning tobacco prevention and control programs conducted on college campuses published between 2000 and 2009. RESULTS: No studies were found that implemented all 5 recommended components of a comprehensive program. Tobacco control programs containing policy and prevention education were used the most and promotion of tobacco-free environments and banning sales of tobacco products were used the least. CONCLUSION: The review suggests that despite the recommendation of comprehensive tobacco control programs to reduce tobacco use on college campuses, few institutions have implemented and evaluated programs consisting of multiple components.