Californians Linking Action with Science for Prevention of Breast Cancer (CLASP-BC)—Phase 2

Kerner, Jon; Kavanaugh-Lynch, Marion; Politis, Christopher; Baezconde‐Garbanati, Lourdes; Prager, Aviva; Brownson, Ross C.

doi:10.3390/ijerph17238863

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An implementation brief put forth by the National Implementation Research Network proposes establishing a “co-creation environment” to promote collaborations among these various stakeholders and supports the capacity to promote the adoption, implementation, and sustainability of research evidence [ 76 ]. Such cross-disciplinary approaches have been used to build capacity and identify and implement breast cancer prevention-related EBIs across multiple jurisdictions in California, which led to the development of sustainable infrastructure models for primary prevention of breast cancer programs and implementation of research evidence [ 77 , 78 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounding implementation science in health equity for cancer prevention and control

Adsul

Chambers

Brandt

et al. 2022

Implement Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The past decade of research has seen theoretical and methodological advances in both implementation science and health equity research, opening a window of opportunity for facilitating and accelerating cross-disciplinary exchanges across these fields that have largely operated in siloes. In 2019 and 2020, the National Cancer Institute’s Consortium for Cancer Implementation Science convened an action group focused on ‘health equity and context’ to identify opportunities to advance implementation science. In this paper, we present a narrative review and synthesis of the relevant literature at the intersection of health equity and implementation science, highlight identified opportunities (i.e., public goods) by the action group for advancing implementation science in cancer prevention and control, and integrate the two by providing key recommendations for future directions. Discussion In the review and synthesis of the literature, we highlight recent advances in implementation science, relevant to promoting health equity (e.g., theories/models/frameworks, adaptations, implementation strategies, study designs, implementation determinants, and outcomes). We acknowledge the contributions from the broader field of health equity research and discuss opportunities for integration and synergy with implementation science, which include (1) articulating an explicit focus on health equity for conducting and reviewing implementation science; (2) promoting an explicit focus on health equity in the theories, models, and frameworks guiding implementation science; and (3) identifying methods for understanding and documenting influences on the context of implementation that incorporate a focus on equity. Summary To advance the science of implementation with a focus on health equity, we reflect on the essential groundwork needed to promote bi-directional learning between the fields of implementation science and health equity research and recommend (1) building capacity among researchers and research institutions for health equity-focused and community-engaged implementation science; (2) incorporating health equity considerations across all key implementation focus areas (e.g., adaptations, implementation strategies, study design, determinants, and outcomes); and (3) continuing a focus on transdisciplinary opportunities in health equity research and implementation science. We believe that these recommendations can help advance implementation science by incorporating an explicit focus on health equity in the context of cancer prevention and control and beyond.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounding implementation science in health equity for cancer prevention and control

Adsul

Chambers

Brandt

et al. 2022

Implement Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Transdisciplinary efforts in primary prevention with participation from the community require policy plans for funding focused on communities that are particularly at risk for the onset of NCDs. These plans may be at the regional level in a particular country, like the CBCRP funding program for which phase 2 of funding support is on risk factors of “ disadvantaged, high risk communities with unmet social needs ” ( 54 ). On a global level, the European Union (EU) has made NCDs a main part of their action plans for health.…”

Section: Integration Of Meso With Micro and Macro Levels In Risk Miti...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Embedding the Community and Individuals in Disease Prevention

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary prevention of non-communicable diseases is one of the most challenging and exciting aspects of medicine and primary care this century. For cancer, it is an urgent matter in light of the increasing burden of the disease among younger people and the higher frequency of more aggressive forms of the disease for all ages. Most chronic disorders result from the influence of the environment on the expression of genes within an individual. The environment at-large encompasses lifestyle (including nutrition), and chemical/physical and social exposures. In cancer, the interaction between the (epi)genetic makeup of an individual and a multiplicity of environmental risk and protecting factors is considered key to disease onset. Thus, like for precision therapy developed for patients, personalized or precision prevention is envisioned for individuals at risk. Prevention means identifying people at higher risk and intervening to reduce the risk. It requires biological markers of risk and non-aggressive preventive actions for the individual, but it also involves acting on the environment and the community. Social scientists are considering micro (individual/family), meso (community), and macro (country population) levels of care to illustrate that problems and solutions exist on different scales. Ideally, the design of interventions in prevention should integrate all these levels. In this perspective article, using the example of breast cancer, we are discussing challenges and possible solutions for a multidisciplinary community of scientists, primary health care practitioners and citizens to develop a holistic approach of primary prevention, keeping in mind equitable access to care.

show abstract

Californians Linking Action with Science for Prevention of Breast Cancer (CLASP-BC)—Phase 2

Cited by 2 publications

References 21 publications

Grounding implementation science in health equity for cancer prevention and control

Grounding implementation science in health equity for cancer prevention and control

Embedding the Community and Individuals in Disease Prevention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About