A Role for Research

Olchanski, Natalia; Cohen, Joshua T.; Neumann, Peter J.

doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.09.016

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The main impetus for including the current set of criteria in our assessment was that these interventions are covered under the ACA and would, thus, enhance health ( 16 ) and increase access to preventive services for virtually all Marylanders. Other states could assess their plans in a similar manner to the methods described here to optimize population uptake and availability of preventive services ( 17 ) that are both evidence-based and cost saving ( 18 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Maryland Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan With Federal Cancer Prevention and Control Recommendations

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionSince the introduction of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2012, 11 million more Americans now have access to preventive services via health care coverage. Several prevention-related recommendations issued by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) are covered under the ACA. State cancer plans often provide prevention strategies, but whether these strategies correspond to federal evidence-based recommendations is unclear. The objective of this article is to assess whether federal evidence-based recommendations, including those covered under the ACA, are included in the Maryland Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan (MCCCP).MethodsA total of 19 federal recommendations pertaining to cancer prevention and control were identified. Inclusion of federal cancer-related recommendations by USPSTF, CDC, and ACIP in the MCCCP’s goals, objectives, and strategies was examined.ResultsNine of the federal recommendations were issued after the MCCCP’s publication. MCCCP recommendations corresponded completely with 4 federal recommendations and corresponded only partially with 3. Reasons for partial correspondence included specification of less restrictive at-risk populations or different intervention implementers. Three federal recommendations were not mentioned in the MCCCP’s goals, objectives, and strategies.ConclusionMany cancer-related federal recommendations were released after the MCCCP’s publication and therefore do not appear in the most current version. We recommend that the results of this analysis be considered in the update of the MCCCP. Our findings underscore the need for a periodic scan for changes to federal recommendations and for adjusting state policies and programs to correspond with federal recommendations, as appropriate for Marylanders.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%