Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comprehensive Cancer Control Partners' Use of and Attitudes About Evidence-Based Practices.
Steele, C Brooke; Rose, John M; Townsend, Julie S; Fonseka, Jamila; Richardson, Lisa C; Chovnick, Gary.
Affiliation
  • Steele CB; 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: BSteele1@cdc.gov.
  • Rose JM; Health and Analytics, Battelle Memorial Institute, Arlington, Virginia, and Seattle, Washington.
  • Townsend JS; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgi.
  • Fonseka J; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgi.
  • Richardson LC; Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgi.
  • Chovnick G; Health and Analytics, Battelle Memorial Institute, Arlington, Virginia, and Seattle, Washington.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 12: E113, 2015 Jul 16.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26182148
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

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.

METHODS:

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.

RESULTS:

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.

CONCLUSIONS:

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.
Sujet(s)

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Connaissances, attitudes et pratiques en santé / Relations communauté-institution / Réseaux communautaires / Pratique factuelle / Tumeurs Type d'étude: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies / Sysrev_observational_studies Limites: Humans Pays/Région comme sujet: America do norte Langue: En Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Sujet du journal: SAUDE PUBLICA Année: 2015 Type de document: Article

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Connaissances, attitudes et pratiques en santé / Relations communauté-institution / Réseaux communautaires / Pratique factuelle / Tumeurs Type d'étude: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies / Sysrev_observational_studies Limites: Humans Pays/Région comme sujet: America do norte Langue: En Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Sujet du journal: SAUDE PUBLICA Année: 2015 Type de document: Article