Development of a Minority Prostate Cancer Research Digest: Communication Strategy Statement for Black Men

Since prostate cancer incidence, prevalence and mortality are still highest among Black men in the United States, it is important to effectively address the factors that contribute to prostate cancer disparities in this at-risk population as well as their low participation in biomedical research/clinical trials. An effective communication strategy that can be used to disseminate information with high public health impact to Black men is one way to combat prostate cancer disparities. The objective of this study was to develop a Minority Prostate Cancer (MiCaP) research communication strategy using focus group methodology and expert in-depth interviews. The communication strategy statement developed in this study provides a guide for message concepts and materials for Black men, including communication content, source, channel, and location. Specifically, it provides recommendations on how to deliver information, how to choose the language and relevant images, how to gain attention, who is preferred to deliver messages, and other ways to engage Black men in health communication strategies. The communication strategy statement was used to develop the MiCaP Research Digest, a research communication program that is currently being tested in Orange County, Duval County, Leon County, Gadsden County, and the Tampa Bay area of Florida

Overcoming Barriers in Conducting a Transatlantic Prostate Cancer Familial Study in Africa: Best Practice from the CaPTC Cohort Study

Conducting prostate cancer research, especially prospective data collection in Africa, has numerous challenges. Some of the difficulties stem from socio-cultural factors that consider sensitive topics about men’s health as taboo. Our primary aim was determine how to overcome barriers in conducting a transatlantic prostate cancer familial study in African males.Key research personnel of the CaPTC Transatlantic Prostate Cancer Familial Project were surveyed about their experiences in implementing the study. The data from the survey was analyzed using SPSS version 18. A total of 15 key study personnel responded to the survey. About 73% of the respondents reported that the participants requested a home or office visit rather than visit a data collection center. Eighty percent (80%) of the respondents reported that the participants had no preference for interviewer gender. The majority (80%) of the interviewers agreed that answers to questions about participants’ sexuality were most challenging to obtain, but with an in-depth explanation of the importance of the study and assurance of privacy, the answers were obtained. The best practice for engaging the community for research include community mobilization through sensitization visits and one-on-one talks, use of community ‘gatekeepers’, introduction by relatives, assurance of privacy of health data obtained, the use of incentives and a promise to give feedback on the results of the study both on a personal and community level

Florida-California Cancer Research, Education and Engagement (CaRE) Health Equity Center: Structure, Innovations, and Initial Outcomes

Introduction The Florida-California Cancer Research, Education, and Engagement (CaRE 2 ) Health Equity Center is a triad partnership committed to increasing institutional capacity for cancer disparity research, the diversity of the cancer workforce, and community empowerment. This article provides an overview of the structure, process innovations, and initial outcomes from the first 4 years of the CaRE 2 triad partnership. Methods CaRE 2 serves diverse populations in Florida and California using a “molecule to the community and back” model. We prioritize research on the complex intersection of biological, environmental, and social determinants health, working together with scientific and health disparities communities, sharing expertise across institutions, bidirectional training, and community outreach. Partnership progress and outcomes were assessed using mixed methods and four Program Steering Committee meetings. Results Research capacity was increased through development of a Living Repository of 81 cancer model systems from minority patients for novel cancer drug development. CaRE 2 funded 15 scientific projects resulting in 38 publications. Workforce diversity entailed supporting 94 cancer trainees (92 URM) and 34 ESIs (32 URM) who coauthored 313 CaRE 2 -related publications and received 48 grants. Community empowerment was promoted via outreaching to more than 3000 individuals, training 145 community cancer advocates (including 28 Community Scientist Advocates), and publishing 10 community reports. CaRE 2 members and trainees together have published 639 articles, received 61 grants, and 57 awards. Conclusion The CaRE 2 partnership has achieved its initial aims. Infrastructure for translational cancer research was expanded at one partner institution, and cancer disparities research was expanded at the two cancer centers