Key milestones during 40 years of behavioral medicine at the National Institutes of Health.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has played a major role in promoting behavioral medicine research over the past 40 years through funding, review, and priority-setting activities and programs including scientific conferences, meetings, workgroups, intramural research, and training opportunities. In this review of NIH activities in support of behavioral medicine over the past four decades, we highlight key events, programs, projects, and milestones that demonstrate the many ways in which the NIH has supported behavioral and social sciences research and advanced the public health while contributing to the evolution of behavioral medicine as a scientific field.

Realizing the promise of social psychology in improving public health.

The theories, phenomena, empirical findings, and methodological approaches that characterize contemporary social psychology hold much promise for addressing enduring problems in public health. Indeed, social psychologists played a major role in the development of the discipline of health psychology during the 1970s and 1980s. The health domain allows for the testing, refinement, and application of many interesting and important research questions in social psychology, and offers the discipline a chance to enhance its reach and visibility. Nevertheless, in a review of recent articles in two major social-psychological journals (Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology), we found that only 3.2% of 467 studies explored health-related topics. In this article, we identify opportunities for research at the interface of social psychology and health, delineate barriers, and offer strategies that can address these barriers as the discipline continues to evolve.

Enduring Cancer Disparities by Persistent Poverty, Rurality, and Race: 1990-1992 to 2014-2018.

BACKGROUND: Most persistent poverty counties are rural and contain high concentrations of racial minorities. Cancer mortality across persistent poverty, rurality, and race is understudied. METHODS: We gathered data on race and cancer deaths (all sites, lung and bronchus, colorectal, liver and intrahepatic bile duct, oropharyngeal, breast and cervical [females], and prostate [males]) from the National Death Index (1990-1992; 2014-2018). We linked these data to county characteristics: 1) persistent poverty or not; and 2) rural or urban. We calculated absolute (range difference [RD]) and relative (range ratio [RR]) disparities for each cancer mortality outcome across persistent poverty, rurality, race, and time. RESULTS: The 1990-1992 RD for all sites combined indicated persistent poverty counties had 12.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 11.37 to 14.09) excess deaths per 100 000 people per year compared with nonpersistent poverty counties; the 2014-2018 RD was 10.99 (95% CI = 10.22 to 11.77). Similarly, the 1990-1992 RR for all sites indicated mortality rates in persistent poverty counties were 1.06 (95% CI = 1.05 to 1.07) times as high as nonpersistent poverty counties; the 2014-2018 RR was 1.07 (95% CI = 1.07 to 1.08). Between 1990-1992 and 2014-2018, absolute and relative disparities by persistent poverty widened for colorectal and breast cancers; however, for remaining outcomes, trends in disparities were stable or mixed. The highest mortality rates were observed among African American or Black residents of rural, persistent poverty counties for all sites, colorectal, oropharyngeal, breast, cervical, and prostate cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality disparities by persistent poverty endured over time for most cancer outcomes, particularly for racial minorities in rural, persistent poverty counties. Multisector interventions are needed to improve cancer outcomes.

A National Map of NCI-Designated Cancer Center Catchment Areas on the 50th Anniversary of the Cancer Centers Program.

BACKGROUND: In 1971, the National Cancer Act created a process to recognize the leadership, facilities, and research efforts at cancer centers throughout the United States. Toward this goal, each NCI-designated cancer center defines and describes a catchment area to which they tailor specific scientific and community engagement activities. METHODS: The geographically defined catchment areas of 63 NCI-designated comprehensive and clinical cancer centers are collated and presented visually. In addition, the NCI-designated cancer center catchment areas are geographically linked with publicly available data sources to aggregate sociodemographic and epidemiologic characteristics across the NCI Cancer Centers Program. RESULTS: The national map portrays the size, shape, and locations for 63 catchment areas of the 71 NCI-designated cancer centers. The findings illustrate the geographic extent of the NCI Cancer Centers Program during the 50th anniversary of the National Cancer Act. CONCLUSIONS: NCI-designated cancer centers occupy a prominent role in the cancer control ecosystem and continue to perform research to address the burden of cancer among their local communities. The strength of the NCI Cancer Centers Program is partly defined by the scope, quality, and impact of community outreach and engagement activities in the catchment areas. IMPACT: The collation and geographic presentation of the distinct, but complementary, NCI-designated cancer center catchment areas are intended to support future research and community outreach activities among NCI-designated cancer centers. See related commentary by Vadaparampil and Tiro, p. 952.

Persistent Poverty and Cancer Mortality Rates: An Analysis of County-Level Poverty Designations.

BACKGROUND: Cancer mortality is higher in counties with high levels of (current) poverty, but less is known about associations with persistent poverty. Persistent poverty counties (with ≥20% of residents in poverty since 1980) face social, structural, and behavioral challenges that may make their residents more vulnerable to cancer. METHODS: We calculated 2007 to 2011 county-level, age-adjusted, and overall and type-specific cancer mortality rates (deaths/100,000 people/year) by persistent poverty classifications, which we contrasted with mortality in counties experiencing current poverty (≥20% of residents in poverty according to 2007-2011 American Community Survey). We used two-sample t tests and multivariate linear regression to assess mortality by persistent poverty, and compared mortality rates across current and persistent poverty levels. RESULTS: Overall cancer mortality was 179.3 [standard error (SE) = 0.55] deaths/100,000 people/year in nonpersistent poverty counties and 201.3 (SE = 1.80) in persistent poverty counties (12.3% higher, P < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, cancer mortality was higher in persistent poverty versus nonpersistent poverty counties for overall cancer mortality as well as for several type-specific mortality rates: lung and bronchus, colorectal, stomach, and liver and intrahepatic bile duct (all P < 0.05). Among counties experiencing current poverty, those counties that were also experiencing persistent poverty had elevated mortality rates for all cancer types as well as lung and bronchus, colorectal, breast, stomach, and liver and intrahepatic bile duct (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer mortality was higher in persistent poverty counties than other counties, including those experiencing current poverty. IMPACT: Etiologic research and interventions, including policies, are needed to address multilevel determinants of cancer disparities in persistent poverty counties.

Advancing Rural Cancer Control Research: National Cancer Institute Efforts to Identify Gaps and Opportunities.

Cancer mortality rates are approximately 8% higher in rural populations and mortality rates are falling more slowly in rural communities, resulting in widening rural-urban health disparities in the United States. The NCI has a long history of supporting health disparities research, including research to understand the health needs, strengths, and opportunities in rural communities. However, the portfolio analysis described in this article underscores the need to significantly accelerate rural cancer control research in partnership with state and local communities. This commentary outlines NCI's efforts over the last four years to address gaps in rural cancer control research and improve cancer prevention, control, and care delivery in rural populations. Future directions, challenges, and opportunities are also discussed.

Five strategies for accelerating the war on cancer in an era of budget deficits.

In recent years, the National Institutes of Health's largest institute, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), has adapted to difficult economic conditions by leveraging its robust infrastructure -- which includes risk factor surveillance and population monitoring, research centers (focused on basic, translation, clinical, and behavioral sciences), clinical trials and health care research networks, and rigorously validated statistical models -- to maximize the impact of scientific progress on the public health. To continue advancement and realize the opportunity of significant, population-level changes in cancer mortality, the NCI recommends that five national-level actions be taken: (1) significantly increase enrollment of Medicare patients into cancer clinical trials through adequate physician reimbursement, (2) increase NCI/Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services collaboration on clinical trials research to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of anticancer drugs, (3) establish a national outcomes research demonstration project to test strategies for measuring and improving health care quality and provide an evidence base for public policy, (4) leverage existing tobacco-control collaborations and possible new authorities at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to realize the outstanding health gains possible from a reduction in tobacco use, and (5) increase colorectal cancer screening rates though intensified collaboration between federal agencies working to address barriers to access and use of screening. These cost-effective strategies provide the opportunity for extraordinary results in an era of budget deficits. Of the chronic diseases, cancer has the strongest national research infrastructure that can be leveraged to produce rapid results to inform budget prioritization and public policy, as well as mobilize new projects to answer critical public health questions.

The genomic applications in practice and prevention network.

The authors describe the rationale and initial development of a new collaborative initiative, the Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network. The network convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health includes multiple stakeholders from academia, government, health care, public health, industry and consumers. The premise of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network is that there is an unaddressed chasm between gene discoveries and demonstration of their clinical validity and utility. This chasm is due to the lack of readily accessible information about the utility of most genomic applications and the lack of necessary knowledge by consumers and providers to implement what is known. The mission of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network is to accelerate and streamline the effective integration of validated genomic knowledge into the practice of medicine and public health, by empowering and sponsoring research, evaluating research findings, and disseminating high quality information on candidate genomic applications in practice and prevention. Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network will develop a process that links ongoing collection of information on candidate genomic applications to four crucial domains: (1) knowledge synthesis and dissemination for new and existing technologies, and the identification of knowledge gaps, (2) a robust evidence-based recommendation development process, (3) translation research to evaluate validity, utility and impact in the real world and how to disseminate and implement recommended genomic applications, and (4) programs to enhance practice, education, and surveillance.

The Scientific Foundation for personal genomics: recommendations from a National Institutes of Health-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention multidisciplinary workshop.

The increasing availability of personal genomic tests has led to discussions about the validity and utility of such tests and the balance of benefits and harms. A multidisciplinary workshop was convened by the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to review the scientific foundation for using personal genomics in risk assessment and disease prevention and to develop recommendations for targeted research. The clinical validity and utility of personal genomics is a moving target with rapidly developing discoveries but little translation research to close the gap between discoveries and health impact. Workshop participants made recommendations in five domains: (1) developing and applying scientific standards for assessing personal genomic tests; (2) developing and applying a multidisciplinary research agenda, including observational studies and clinical trials to fill knowledge gaps in clinical validity and utility; (3) enhancing credible knowledge synthesis and information dissemination to clinicians and consumers; (4) linking scientific findings to evidence-based recommendations for use of personal genomics; and (5) assessing how the concept of personal utility can affect health benefits, costs, and risks by developing appropriate metrics for evaluation. To fulfill the promise of personal genomics, a rigorous multidisciplinary research agenda is needed.

Population Health Assessment in NCI-Designated Cancer Center Catchment Areas.

In May 2016, the NCI announced supplemental funding for NCI-Designated Cancer Centers to conduct research to better characterize populations within cancer center catchment areas. The initiative was intended to support primary data collection efforts to better define and describe cancer center catchment areas using a multilevel population health framework. The long-term goal was to facilitate collaborations in which researchers, providers, public health practitioners, and nonprofit organizations could utilize the data to develop or expand applied cancer control research, planning, and implementation, with an emphasis on local health disparities and communication inequalities. This CEBP Focus issue on "Population Health Assessment in Cancer Center Catchment Areas" highlights the results from those catchment area data collection efforts. Articles highlight research from surveys conducted to define and describe cancer center catchment areas using both probability and nonprobability designs and a variety of sampling techniques, survey modes, and data linkages. Some articles report pooled analyses of data collected by multiple cancer centers to highlight local versus national comparisons based on standardized behavioral and demographic measures. Others examine rural-urban differences in measures relevant to cancer prevention and control. The studies published in this Focus will provide the field with a myriad of methodologic approaches for defining and describing cancer center catchment areas.

Frustrated and confused: the American public rates its cancer-related information-seeking experiences.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring access to high-quality cancer-related information is important for the success of cancer prevention and control efforts. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a population-based assessment of the barriers faced by people searching for cancer information. DESIGN: Cross-sectional data from the National Cancer Institute's 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of individuals in the USA (n = 6,369). MEASUREMENTS: We assessed whether respondents had ever sought cancer-related information and examined ratings of their information-seeking experiences and beliefs regarding causes of cancer and its prevention. Linear and logistic regression models were estimated to determine predictors of negative experiences and associations between experiences and cancer beliefs. RESULTS: Nearly one half (44.9%) of Americans had searched for cancer information. Many reported negative experiences, including the search process requiring a lot of effort (47.7%), expressing frustration (41.3%), and concerns about the quality of the information found (57.7%). Respondents lacking health insurance or a high school education experienced the greatest difficulty. Compared to those reporting the most positive experiences, information seekers reporting more negative experiences were more likely to report that almost everything caused cancer [odds ratio (OR) 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5-2.6], that not much can be done to prevent cancer (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.9-3.8), and that it is hard to know which cancer prevention recommendations to follow (OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.3-4.5). CONCLUSIONS: While a significant proportion of the American public searches for cancer information, suboptimal experiences are common. Facilitation of information seeking will be critical for promoting informed decision making in cancer prevention and control.

Measuring collaboration and transdisciplinary integration in team science.

PURPOSE: As the science of team science evolves, the development of measures that assess important processes related to working in transdisciplinary teams is critical. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to present the psychometric properties of scales measuring collaborative processes and transdisciplinary integration. METHODS: Two hundred-sixteen researchers and research staff participating in the Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Centers (TTURC) Initiative completed the TTURC researcher survey. Confirmatory-factor analyses were used to verify the hypothesized factor structures. Descriptive data pertinent to these scales and their associations with other constructs were included to further examine the properties of the scales. RESULTS: Overall, the hypothesized-factor structures, with some minor modifications, were validated. A total of four scales were developed, three to assess collaborative processes (satisfaction with the collaboration, impact of collaboration, trust and respect) and one to assess transdisciplinary integration. All scales were found to have adequate internal consistency (i.e., Cronbach alpha's were all >0.70); were correlated with intermediate markers of collaborations (e.g., the collaboration and transdisciplinary-integration scales were positively associated with the perception of a center's making good progress in creating new methods, new science and models, and new interventions); and showed some ability to detect group differences. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides valid tools that can be utilized to examine the underlying processes of team science--an important step toward advancing the science of team science.

Interpersonal responses among sibling dyads tested for BRCA1/BRCA2 gene mutations.

OBJECTIVE: The familial context plays an important role in psychosocial responses to genetic testing. The purpose of this study was to compare sibling pairs with different combinations of BRCA1/BRCA2 test results on measures of affect, interpersonal responses, and physiological reactions. DESIGN: Forty-nine sibling dyads with different combinations of BRCA1/BRCA2 test results (i.e., mixed, positive, negative) completed a questionnaire, and 35 of the dyads also participated in a laboratory-based discussion of genetic testing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome variables included participant reports of supportive actions toward their sibling, state anger and anxiety, perceptions of sibling behavior, and electrodermal responses. RESULTS: Compared to positive and negative dyads, mixed pairs reported less friendly general support actions, noted more anger, and perceived their sibling to be less friendly and more dominant during the interactions. In comparisons between same-result (i.e., positive, negative) pairs, positive dyads reported more dominant support behaviors and perceived their sibling to be friendlier during the interactions. CONCLUSION: Data suggest that siblings who have different test results may experience more interpersonal strain than siblings who have the same test result. Future research on genetic testing and family relationships can expand upon these findings.

The conception of the ABCD study: From substance use to a broad NIH collaboration.

Adolescence is a time of dramatic changes in brain structure and function, and the adolescent brain is highly susceptible to being altered by experiences like substance use. However, there is much we have yet to learn about how these experiences influence brain development, how they promote or interfere with later health outcomes, or even what healthy brain development looks like. A large longitudinal study beginning in early adolescence could help us understand the normal variability in adolescent brain and cognitive development and tease apart the many factors that influence it. Recent advances in neuroimaging, informatics, and genetics technologies have made it feasible to conduct a study of sufficient size and scope to answer many outstanding questions. At the same time, several Institutes across the NIH recognized the value of collaborating in such a project because of its ability to address the role of biological, environmental, and behavioral factors like gender, pubertal hormones, sports participation, and social/economic disparities on brain development as well as their association with the emergence and progression of substance use and mental illness including suicide risk. Thus, the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study was created to answer the most pressing public health questions of our day.

Making the Case for Investment in Rural Cancer Control: An Analysis of Rural Cancer Incidence, Mortality, and Funding Trends.

Estimates of those living in rural counties vary from 46.2 to 59 million, or 14% to 19% of the U.S. POPULATION: Rural communities face disadvantages compared with urban areas, including higher poverty, lower educational attainment, and lack of access to health services. We aimed to demonstrate rural-urban disparities in cancer and to examine NCI-funded cancer control grants focused on rural populations. Estimates of 5-year cancer incidence and mortality from 2009 to 2013 were generated for counties at each level of the rural-urban continuum and for metropolitan versus nonmetropolitan counties, for all cancers combined and several individual cancer types. We also examined the number and foci of rural cancer control grants funded by NCI from 2011 to 2016. Cancer incidence was 447 cases per 100,000 in metropolitan counties and 460 per 100,000 in nonmetropolitan counties (P < 0.001). Cancer mortality rates were 166 per 100,000 in metropolitan counties and 182 per 100,000 in nonmetropolitan counties (P < 0.001). Higher incidence and mortality in rural areas were observed for cervical, colorectal, kidney, lung, melanoma, and oropharyngeal cancers. There were 48 R- and 3 P-mechanism rural-focused grants funded from 2011 to 2016 (3% of 1,655). Further investment is needed to disentangle the effects of individual-level SES and area-level factors to understand observed effects of rurality on cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(7); 992-7. ©2017 AACR.

How well do people recall risk factor test results? Accuracy and bias among cholesterol screening participants.

The authors conducted a community-based cholesterol screening study to examine accuracy of recall for self-relevant health information in long-term autobiographical memory. Adult community residents (N = 496) were recruited to participate in a laboratory-based cholesterol screening and were also provided cholesterol counseling in accordance with national guidelines. Participants were subsequently interviewed 1, 3, or 6 months later to assess their memory for their test results. Participants recalled their exact cholesterol levels inaccurately (38.0% correct) but their cardiovascular risk category comparatively well (88.7% correct). Recall errors showed a systematic bias: Individuals who received the most undesirable test results were most likely to remember their cholesterol scores and cardiovascular risk categories as lower (i.e., healthier) than those actually received. Recall bias was unrelated to age, education, knowledge, self-rated health status, and self-reported efforts to reduce cholesterol. The findings provide evidence that recall of self-relevant health information is susceptible to self-enhancement bias.

Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey.

BACKGROUND: The context in which patients consume health information has changed dramatically with diffusion of the Internet, advances in telemedicine, and changes in media health coverage. The objective of this study was to provide nationally representative estimates for health-related uses of the Internet, level of trust in health information sources, and preferences for cancer information sources. METHODS: Data from the Health Information National Trends Survey were used. A total of 6369 persons 18 years or older were studied. The main outcome measures were online health activities, levels of trust, and source preference. RESULTS: Analyses indicated that 63.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.7%-64.3%) of the US adult population in 2003 reported ever going online, with 63.7% (95% CI, 61.7%-65.8%) of the online population having looked for health information for themselves or others at least once in the previous 12 months. Despite newly available communication channels, physicians remained the most highly trusted information source to patients, with 62.4% (95% CI, 60.8%-64.0%) of adults expressing a lot of trust in their physicians. When asked where they preferred going for specific health information, 49.5% (95% CI, 48.1%-50.8%) reported wanting to go to their physicians first. When asked where they actually went, 48.6% (95% CI, 46.1%-51.0%) reported going online first, with only 10.9% (95% CI, 9.5%-12.3%) going to their physicians first. CONCLUSION: The Health Information National Trends Survey data portray a tectonic shift in the ways in which patients consume health and medical information, with more patients looking for information online before talking with their physicians.

Risks and opportunities for psychology's contribution to the war on cancer.

This special issue of American Psychologist reviews a broad, diverse, and growing research literature that has established the discipline as an essential source of evidence concerning cancer prevention and control. Nevertheless, the history of psychological science that is intended to inform cancer control suggests a number of risks going forward that could attenuate the impact of this work. Fortunately, the field also faces new opportunities to contribute more substantially, especially if psychologists engage the broader biomedical and public health communities through rigorous, relevant, multilevel research that is informed by current knowledge of the disease and its treatment, the skills required to participate in large-scale trans-disciplinary team science, and an appreciation of the economic, organizational, and policy context of cancer control at the local and national levels.