The Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership (MVTCP): History and Highlights of 20 Years of Accomplishments

Pal, Tuya; Suiter, Sarah V.; Moses, Harold L.; Smoot, Duane T.; Richmond, A. E.; Tiriveedhi, Venkataswarup; Whalen, Margaret M.; Adunyah, Samuel E.

doi:10.1353/hpu.2022.0032

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We collaborated with a local community advisory board 43 composed of 8 community members with various cancer diagnoses, tobacco use experiences, and racial and ethnic backgrounds and a history of collaborating with the study team (J.R., M.C.A.) on lung cancer research to develop semistructured interview and focus group guides (presented in eAppendixes 2 and 3 in Supplement 1 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Lung Cancer Screening Decisions and Environmental and Psychosocial Factors

Richmond,

Fernandez,

Bonnet

et al. 2024

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceScreening for lung cancer using low-dose computed tomography is associated with reduced lung cancer–specific mortality, but uptake is low in the US; understanding how patients make decisions to engage with lung cancer screening is critical for increasing uptake. Prior research has focused on individual-level psychosocial factors, but environmental factors (eg, historical contexts that include experiencing racism) and modifying factors—those that can be changed to make it easier or harder to undergo screening—also likely affect screening decisions.ObjectiveTo investigate environmental, psychosocial, and modifying factors influencing lung cancer screening decision-making and develop a conceptual framework depicting relationships between these factors.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis multimethod qualitative study was conducted from December 2021 to June 2022 using virtual semistructured interviews and 4 focus groups (3-4 participants per group). All participants met US Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening (ie, age 50-80 years, at least a 20 pack-year smoking history, and either currently smoke or quit within the past 15 years). Screening-eligible US participants were recruited using an online panel.Main Outcomes and MeasuresKey factors influencing screening decisions (eg, knowledge, beliefs, barriers, and facilitators) were the main outcome. A theory-informed, iterative inductive-deductive approach was applied to analyze data and develop a conceptual framework summarizing results.ResultsAmong 34 total participants (interviews, 20 [59%]; focus groups, 14 [41%]), mean (SD) age was 59.1 (4.8) years and 20 (59%) identified as female. Half had a household income below $20 000 (17 [50%]). Participants emphasized historical and present-day racism as critical factors contributing to mistrust of health care practitioners and avoidance of medical procedures like screening. Participants reported that other factors, such as public transportation availability, also influenced decisions. Additionally, participants described psychosocial processes involved in decisions, such as perceived screening benefits, lung cancer risk appraisal, and fear of a cancer diagnosis or harmful encounters with practitioners. In addition, participants identified modifying factors (eg, insurance coverage) that could make receiving screening easier or harder.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this qualitative study of patient lung cancer screening decisions, environmental, psychosocial, and modifying factors influenced screening decisions. The findings suggest that systems-level interventions, such as those that help practitioners understand and discuss patients’ prior negative health care experiences, are needed to promote effective screening decision-making.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient Lung Cancer Screening Decisions and Environmental and Psychosocial Factors

Richmond,

Fernandez,

Bonnet

et al. 2024

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Full descriptions of the partnership model can be found elsewhere ( Adunyah et al. , 2010 ; Pal et al. , 2022 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal Education and Career Outcomes of a Cancer Research Training Program for Underrepresented Students: The Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership

Meadows¹,

Suiter²,

Sealy

et al. 2022

LSE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Meharry-Vanderbilt Cancer Partnership (later the Meharry-Vanderbilt-TSU Cancer Partnership, or MVTCP) was established in 1999 to facilitate collaborative cancer research. The partnership won inaugural funding from the Comprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program in 2001 and has operated continuously since that time (Pal et al, 2022). The CPACHE program is one of several National Cancer Institute (NCI) initiatives focused on reducing health disparities among racially and ethnically minoritized populations.…”

Section: Cancer Health Disparities and Research Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We restricted the analysis to publications from 2009 onward because 2009 was the year in which Tennessee State University (TSU) was first engaged as a collaborative partner. (TSU was included as an officially funded partner institution in the grant cycle beginning in 2011; see Pal et al, 2022). The final analytic sample consisted of 323 unique publications from 362 unique investigators and students.…”

Section: Data Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network Analysis for Formative Evaluation of Collaborative, Team Science Research Partnerships

Liu,

Meadows,

Wiley

et al. 2023

Eval Health Prof

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer health disparities persist across the cancer care continuum despite decades of effort to eliminate them. Among the strategies currently used to address these disparities are multi-institution research initiatives that engage multiple stakeholders and change efforts. Endemic to the theory of change of such programs is the idea that collaboration—across institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks—is necessary to improve outcomes. Despite this emphasis on collaboration, however, it is not often a focus of evaluation for these programs and others like them. In this paper we describe a method for evaluating collaboration within the Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership using network analysis. Specifically, we used network analysis of co-authorship on academic publications to visualize the growth and patterns of scientific collaboration across partnership institutions, research disciplines, and academic ranks over time. We presented the results of the network analysis to internal and external advisory groups, creating the opportunity to discuss partnership collaboration, celebrate successes, and identify opportunities for improvement. We propose that basic network analysis of existing data along with network visualizations can foster conversation and feedback and are simple and effective ways to evaluate collaboration initiatives.

show abstract

The Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership (MVTCP): History and Highlights of 20 Years of Accomplishments

Cited by 3 publications

References 23 publications

Patient Lung Cancer Screening Decisions and Environmental and Psychosocial Factors

Patient Lung Cancer Screening Decisions and Environmental and Psychosocial Factors

Longitudinal Education and Career Outcomes of a Cancer Research Training Program for Underrepresented Students: The Meharry-Vanderbilt-Tennessee State University Cancer Partnership

Network Analysis for Formative Evaluation of Collaborative, Team Science Research Partnerships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About