Journal of Clinical and Translational Science (Jan 2024)

Evaluation and lessons learned from the dissemination and implementation science scholars program in the national cancer prevention and control research network

  • Daniela B. Friedman,
  • Cam Escoffery,
  • Elaine H. Morrato,
  • Cynthia A. Thomson,
  • Courtney N. Petagna,
  • Freda Allyson Hucek,
  • Mary Wangen,
  • Aubrey Villalobos,
  • James R. Hebert,
  • Samuel Noblet,
  • Mayank Sakhuja,
  • David O. Garcia,
  • Jennifer L. Cruz,
  • Stephanie B. Wheeler

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2024.625
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-funded Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) has been a leader in cancer-related dissemination & implementation (D&I) science. Given increased demand for D&I research, the CPCRN Scholars Program launched in 2021 to expand the number of practitioners, researchers, and trainees proficient in cancer D&I science methods. Methods: The evaluation was informed by a logic model and data collected through electronic surveys. Through an application process (baseline survey), we assessed scholars’ competencies in D&I science domains/subdomains, collected demographic data, and asked scholars to share proposed project ideas. We distributed an exit survey one month after program completion to assess scholars’ experience and engagement with the program and changes in D&I competencies. A follow-up survey was administered to alumni nine months post-program to measure their continued network engagement, accomplishments, and skills. Results: Three cohorts completed the program, consisting of 20, 17, and 25 scholars in Years 1-3, respectively. There was a significant increase in the total D&I competency scores for all three cohorts for 4 overarching domains and 43 subdomains (MPre = 1.38 MPost = 1.89). Differences were greatest for the domain of Practice-Based Considerations (0.50 mean difference) and Theory & Analysis (0.47 mean difference). Alumni surveys revealed that scholars appreciated access to D&I-focused webinars, toolkits, and training resources. 80% remain engaged with CPCRN workgroups and investigators. Conclusions: Program evaluation with scholars and alumni helped with ongoing quality assurance, introspection, and iterative program adaptation to meet scholars’ needs. This approach is recommended for large-scale capacity-building training programs.

Keywords