The CCC National Partnership: an example of organizations collaborating on comprehensive cancer control

Hohman, Karin; Rochester, Phyllis; Kean, Tom; Belle-Isle, Lori

doi:10.1007/s10552-010-9644-0

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some CCC partner organizations receive financial assistance from CCC programs to help implement cancer plans; nearly one-third of NCCCP program directors reported that they provide funding and other support to their partners for CCC activities ( 16 ). The CCC National Partnership, a collaborative group of diverse national organizations, also provides financial resources to CCC coalitions and partnerships ( 27 ). Collaboration and leveraging shared resources are embodied in the definition of CCC, and both are critical to sustaining efforts by communities and their partners to reduce the burden of cancer.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive Cancer Control Partners’ Use of and Attitudes About Evidence-Based Practices

Steele

Rose

Townsend³

et al. 2015

Prev. Chronic Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionNational Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) awardees are encouraged to work with partners (eg, nonprofit organizations) to develop and implement plans to reduce the cancer burden in their jurisdictions using evidence-based practices (EBPs). However, the extent of EBP use among awardees and their partners is not well understood.MethodsFrom March through July 2012, we conducted a web-based survey of program partners referred by NCCCP program directors who were involved in implementation of cancer control plans.ResultsApproximately 53% of referred partners (n = 83) completed surveys, 91.6% of whom represented organizations. Most partners reported involvement in helping to identify (80.5%), adapt (81.7%), implement (90.4%), and evaluate (81.9%) EBPs. The factors rated most frequently as very important when selecting EBPs were “consistent with our organization’s mission” (89.2%) and “cost-effective” (81.9%). Although most respondents said that their organizations understood the importance of using EBPs (84.3%) and had adequate access to cancer registry data (74.7%), few reported having sufficient financial resources to develop new EBPs (7.9%). The most frequently mentioned benefit of using EBPs was that they are proven to work. Resource limitations and difficulty adapting EBPs for specific populations and settings were challenges.ConclusionsOur findings help indicate how NCCCP partners are involved in using EBPs and can guide ongoing efforts to encourage the use of EBPs for cancer control. The challenges of using EBPs that partners identified highlight the need to improve strategies to translate cancer prevention and control research into practice in real-world settings and for diverse populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive Cancer Control Partners’ Use of and Attitudes About Evidence-Based Practices

Steele

Rose

Townsend³

et al. 2015

Prev. Chronic Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The addition of a recurring Coalition Corner discussion in 2012 furthered NCI’s collaboration with the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (18). Coalition Corner provides cancer control coalitions in the states, tribal nations, and territories a virtual space for asking questions, discussing achievements, and sharing challenges.…”

Section: Developing An Online Community Of Practice In the Federal Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research to Reality: Moving Evidence Into Practice Through an Online Community of Practice

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can a community of practice help further the practical application of cancer control research? In 2011, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) launched an online community of practice, Research to Reality (R2R). R2R aims to infuse evidence-based strategies into communities by engaging researchers and practitioners in a joint approach to research dissemination. To measure community growth and engagement, NCI measures data across 3 program domains: content, interaction, and activity. NCI uses Web analytics, usability testing, and content analyses to manage and evaluate R2R. As of December 2013, R2R had more than 1,700 registered members. More than 500 researchers and practitioners register for the monthly cyber-seminars, and 40% return each month. R2R hosts more than 15,500 page views and 5,000 site visits in an average month. This article describes the process of convening this online community and quantifies our experiences to date.

show abstract

“…The Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (CCCNP) is a group of 19 organizations that are dedicated to supporting comprehensive cancer control (CCC) coalitions in the U.S. states, tribes, territories, and U.S. affiliated Pacific Island Jurisdictions [11]. With funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, seven tribes and tribal organizations, and seven territories and U.S. Pacific Island jurisdictions have produced cancer control plans [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating centralized technical assistance as an implementation strategy to improve cancer prevention and control

Moreland-Russell

Adsul

Nasir

et al. 2018

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In 2015–2016, the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership provided technical assistance workshops to support 22 cancer coalitions in increasing human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination uptake and increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in their local communities. As national efforts continue to invest in providing technical assistance, there is a current gap in understanding its use as a strategy to accelerate implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for cancer prevention. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of technical assistance on the participants’ knowledge, attitudes, and skills for implementing EBIs in their local context and enhancing state team collaboration. Methods Data were collected August-November 2017 using web-based questionnaires from 44 HPV workshop participants and 66 CRC workshop participants. Results Both HPV vaccination and CRC screening workshop participants reported changes in knowledge, attitudes, and skills related to implementing EBIs in their local state context. Several participants reported increased abilities in communicating and coordinating with partners in their states and utilizing additional implementation strategies to increase HPV vaccination uptake and CRC screening rates. Conclusions Findings from this study suggest that providing technical assistance to members of comprehensive cancer control coalitions is useful in promoting collaborations and building capacity for implementing EBIs for cancer prevention and control.

show abstract

The CCC National Partnership: an example of organizations collaborating on comprehensive cancer control

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Comprehensive Cancer Control Partners’ Use of and Attitudes About Evidence-Based Practices

Comprehensive Cancer Control Partners’ Use of and Attitudes About Evidence-Based Practices

Research to Reality: Moving Evidence Into Practice Through an Online Community of Practice

Evaluating centralized technical assistance as an implementation strategy to improve cancer prevention and control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About