Background: In this article, we describe the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP) pilot and the evaluation designed to assess its role, function, and relevance to the NCI's research mission. In doing so, we describe the evolution of and rationale for the NCCCP concept, participating sites' characteristics, its multi-faceted aims to enhance clinical research and quality of care in community settings, and the role of strategic partnerships, both within and outside of the NCCCP network, in achieving program objectives.

Our objective was to present the findings of an opt-in, school-based eye care service for children attending 11 special schools in England and use these findings to determine whether a vision screening programme would be appropriate for this population. Data from eye examinations provided to 949 pupils (mean age 10.7 years) was analysed to determine the prevalence and aetiology of visual deficiencies and reported eye care history. For 46.2% (n = 438) of pupils, a visual deficiency was recorded. 12.5% of all the children seen (n = 119) had a visual deficiency that was previously undiagnosed. Referral for a medical opinion was made for 3.1% (n = 29) of pupils seen by the service. Spectacle correction was needed for 31.5% (n = 299) of pupils; for 12.9% (122) these were prescribed for the first time. 3.7% (n = 11) of parents/carers of pupils needing spectacles chose not to use the spectacle dispensing service offered in school. Eye care history was available for 847 pupils (89.3%). Of the pupils for whom an eye care history was available, 44% (n = 373) reported no history of any previous eye care and10.7% (n = 91) reported a history of attending a community optical practice/opticians. Only one pupil from the school entry 4–5 age group (0.6% of age group n = 156) would have passed vision screening using current Public Health England screening guidelines. Children with a diagnosis of autism were significantly less likely to be able to provide a reliable measurement of visual acuity. This study supports previously published evidence of a very high prevalence of visual problems in children with the most complex needs and a significant unmet need in this group. It demonstrates routine school entry vision screening using current Public Health England guidelines is not appropriate for this group of children and very low uptake of community primary eye care services.

Summary Background We undertook a Grand Challenges in Global Eye Health prioritisation exercise to identify the key issues that must be addressed to improve eye health in the context of an ageing population, to eliminate persistent inequities in health-care access, and to mitigate widespread resource limitations. Methods Drawing on methods used in previous Grand Challenges studies, we used a multi-step recruitment strategy to assemble a diverse panel of individuals from a range of disciplines relevant to global eye health from all regions globally to participate in a three-round, online, Delphi-like, prioritisation process to nominate and rank challenges in global eye health. Through this process, we developed both global and regional priority lists. Findings Between Sept 1 and Dec 12, 2019, 470 individuals complete round 1 of the process, of whom 336 completed all three rounds (round 2 between Feb 26 and March 18, 2020, and round 3 between April 2 and April 25, 2020) 156 (46%) of 336 were women, 180 (54%) were men. The proportion of participants who worked in each region ranged from 104 (31%) in sub-Saharan Africa to 21 (6%) in central Europe, eastern Europe, and in central Asia. Of 85 unique challenges identified after round 1, 16 challenges were prioritised at the global level; six focused on detection and treatment of conditions (cataract, refractive error, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, services for children and screening for early detection), two focused on addressing shortages in human resource capacity, five on other health service and policy factors (including strengthening policies, integration, health information systems, and budget allocation), and three on improving access to care and promoting equity. Interpretation This list of Grand Challenges serves as a starting point for immediate action by funders to guide investment in research and innovation in eye health. It challenges researchers, clinicians, and policy makers to build collaborations to address specific challenges. Funding The Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust, Moorfields Eye Charity, National Institute for Health Research Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, Sightsavers, The Fred Hollows Foundation, The Seva Foundation, British Council for the Prevention of Blindness, and Christian Blind Mission. Translations For the French, Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese, Arabic and Persian translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Background: In this article, we describe the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP) pilot and the evaluation designed to assess its role, function, and relevance to the NCI's research mission. In doing so, we describe the evolution of and rationale for the NCCCP concept, participating sites' characteristics, its multi-faceted aims to enhance clinical research and quality of care in community settings, and the role of strategic partnerships, both within and outside of the NCCCP network, in achieving program objectives. Discussion: The evaluation of the NCCCP is conceptualized as a mixed method multi-layered assessment of organizational innovation and performance which includes mapping the evolution of site development as a means of understanding the inter-and intra-organizational change in the pilot, and the application of specific evaluation metrics for assessing the implementation, operations, and performance of the NCCCP pilot. The assessment of the cost of the pilot as an additional means of informing the longer-term feasibility and sustainability of the program is also discussed. Summary: The NCCCP is a major systems-level set of organizational innovations to enhance clinical research and care delivery in diverse communities across the United States. Assessment of the extent to which the program achieves its aims will depend on a full understanding of how individual, organizational, and environmental factors align (or fail to align) to achieve these improvements, and at what cost.

In 1971, Congress passed the National Cancer Act, landmark legislation that reorganized the National Institutes of Health's National Cancer Institute (NCI). The Act included a new focus on cancer control, including the requirement that the NCI award research grants and contracts, in collaboration with other public agencies and private industry, to conduct cancer control activities related to the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of cancer. The requirement placed the NCI at the nexus of a rapidly changing science and a complex and dynamic healthcare delivery system and involved an evolutionary transformation to advance cancer control and cancer care delivery research along the cancer care continuum. Analysis is based on a qualitative ethnographic approach using historical records, oral histories, and targeted interviews. The multimethod approach provided the opportunity to describe to the vision, leadership, and struggle to build an infrastructure, expand expertise, and forge collaboration with the NCI and a complex and changing healthcare system. As the 50th anniversary of the National Cancer Act approaches in 2020, the process and these achievements are at risk of being taken for granted or lost in the flow of history. Documenting the process, milestones, and key players provides insight and guidance for continuing to improve cancer care, advance research, and reduce cancer incidence and mortality. Cancer care is a microcosm of the larger healthcare system providing insight and lessons on the importance of developing and maintaining a research infrastructure and the role of multi- level collaboration and partnerships involving both the private and public sectors.

No abstract

Radiation therapy is a critical component for curative and palliative treatment of cancer and is used in more than half of all patients with cancer. Yet there is a global shortage of access to this treatment, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, where there is a shortage of technical staff as well as equipment. Linear accelerators (LINACs) offer state-of-the-art treatment, but this technology is expensive to acquire, operate and service, especially for low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), and often their harsh environment negatively affects the performance of LINACs, causing downtime. A global initiative was launched in 2016 to address the technology and system barriers to providing radiation therapy in LMICs through the development of a novel LINAC-based radiation therapy system designed for their challenging environments. As the LINAC prototype design phase progressed, it was recognised that additional information was needed from LMICs on the performance of LINAC components, on variables that may influence machine performance and their association, if any, with equipment downtime. Thus, a survey was developed to collect these data from all countries in Africa that have LINAC-based radiation therapy facilities. In order to understand the extent to which these performance factors are the same or different in high-income countries, facilities in Canada, Switzerland, the UK and the USA were invited to participate in the survey, as was Jordan, a middle-income country. Throughout this process, LMIC representatives have provided input on technology challenges in their respective countries. This report presents the method used to conduct this multilevel study of the macro-and microenvironments, the organisation of departments, the technology, the training and the service models that will provide input into the design of a LINAC prototype for a LINAC-based radiation therapy system that will improve access to radiation therapy and thus improve cancer treatment outcomes. It is important to note that new technology should be introduced in a contextual manner so as not to disrupt existing health systems inadvertently, especially with regards to existing staffing, infrastructure and socioeconomic issues. A detailed analysis of data is underway and will be presented in a follow-up report. Selected preliminary results of the study are the observation that LINAC-based facilities in LMICs experience downtime associated with failures in multileaf collimators and vacuum pumps, as well as power instability. Also, that there is a strong association of gross national product per capita with the number of LINACs per population.

No abstract