No abstract

The National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Implementation Science in Cancer Control Centers (ISC3) Network represents a large-scale initiative to create an infrastructure to support and enable the efficient, effective, and equitable translation of approaches and evidence-based treatments to reduce cancer risk and improve outcomes. This Cancer Moonshot funded ISC3 Network consists of seven P50 Centers that support and advance the rapid development, testing, and refinement of innovative approaches to implement a range of evidence-based cancer control interventions. The Centers were designed to have research-practice partnerships at their core, and to create the opportunity for a series of pilot studies that could explore new and sometimes risky ideas and embed in their infrastructure a two-way engagement and collaboration essential to stimulating lasting change. ISC3 also seeks to enhance capacity of researchers, practitioners and communities to apply implementation science approaches, methods, and measures. The Organizing Framework that guides the work of ISC3 highlights a collective set of three core areas of collaboration within and among Centers, including: (1) assess and incorporate dynamic, multilevel context; (2) develop and conduct rapid and responsive pilot and methods studies; and (3) build capacity for knowledge development and exchange. Core operating principles that under-gird the framework include open collaboration, consideration of the dynamic context and engagement of multiple implementation partners to advance pragmatic methods, advancement of health equity, and facilitation of leadership and capacity building across Implementation Science and cancer control.

No abstract

Background Comprehensive state firearm policies related to intimate partner violence (IPV) may have a significant public health impact on non-lethal IPV-related injuries. Research indicates that more restrictive firearm policies may reduce risk for intimate partner homicide, however it is unclear whether firearm policies prevent or reduce the risk of non-lethal IPV-related injuries. This study sought to examine associations between state-level policies and injuries among U.S. IPV survivors. Methods Individual-level data were drawn from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, a nationally-representative study of noninstitutionalized adults. State-level data were drawn from a firearm policy compendium. Multivariable regressions were used to test associations of individual policies with non-fatal IPV-related injuries (N = 5493). Regression models were also conducted to explore differences in the policy-injury associations among women and men survivors. Results Three categories of policies were associated with IPV-related injuries. The odds of injuries was lower for IPV survivors living in states that prohibited firearm possession and require firearm relinquishment among persons convicted of IPV-related misdemeanors (aOR [95% CI] = .76 [.59, .97]); prohibited firearm possession and require firearm relinquishment among persons subject to IPV-related restraining orders (aOR [95% CI] = .81 [.66, .98]); and prohibited firearm possession among convicted of stalking (aOR [95% CI] = .82 [.68, .98]) than IPV survivors living in states without these policies. There was a significant difference between women and men survivors in the association between IPV-related misdemeanors policy and injuries (B [SE] = .60 [.29]), such that the association was stronger for men survivors (aOR [95% CI] = .10 [.06, .17]) than women survivors (aOR [95% CI] = .60 [.48, .76]). Conclusions Restrictive state firearm policies regarding IPV may provide unique opportunities to protect IPV survivors from injuries.