Cancer Health Impact Program (CHIP): Identifying Social and Demographic Associations of mHealth Access and Cancer Screening Behaviors Among Brooklyn, New York, Residents

Social and Demographic Influences of Trust in Cancer Information Among Brooklyn, New York Residents

Little is known regarding the patterns of trust sources for cancer information among diverse populations in the US, which is particularly poignant during the current era of misinformation. Our objective to assess trust from different sources among a sample of Brooklyn, New York residents. Using data from the NCI funded Brooklyn Cancer Health Impact Program, we examined HINTS validated questions examining trust in cancer information across 9 sources. Logistic regression models were used to examine associations with cancer information trust sources. For trust in government health agencies, participants who had less than a college degree were almost 30% less likely to report high levels of trust (aOR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52-0.98), participants who reported a household income under $50,000 were 35% less likely report high levels of trust (aOR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.89). Participants whose primary language was Spanish were significantly less likely to trust government (aOR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.29-0.70), newspapers and magazines (aOR: 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.84), and charitable organizations (aOR: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31-0.75) compared to participants whose primary was English. New York is the most populous city in the US, a city of immigrants, and it is important for healthcare and public health professionals to explore how they can utilize media to provide accurate scientific evidence to combat cancer misinformation.

A National Map of NCI-Designated Cancer Center Catchment Areas on the 50th Anniversary of the Cancer Centers Program

BACKGROUND

In 1971, the National Cancer Act created a process to recognize the leadership, facilities, and research efforts at cancer centers throughout the United States. Toward this goal, each NCI-designated cancer center defines and describes a catchment area to which they tailor specific scientific and community engagement activities.

METHODS

The geographically defined catchment areas of 63 NCI-designated comprehensive and clinical cancer centers are collated and presented visually. In addition, the NCI-designated cancer center catchment areas are geographically linked with publicly available data sources to aggregate sociodemographic and epidemiologic characteristics across the NCI Cancer Centers Program.

RESULTS

The national map portrays the size, shape, and locations for 63 catchment areas of the 71 NCI-designated cancer centers. The findings illustrate the geographic extent of the NCI Cancer Centers Program during the 50th anniversary of the National Cancer Act.

CONCLUSIONS

NCI-designated cancer centers occupy a prominent role in the cancer control ecosystem and continue to perform research to address the burden of cancer among their local communities. The strength of the NCI Cancer Centers Program is partly defined by the scope, quality, and impact of community outreach and engagement activities in the catchment areas.

IMPACT

The collation and geographic presentation of the distinct, but complementary, NCI-designated cancer center catchment areas are intended to support future research and community outreach activities among NCI-designated cancer centers. See related commentary by Vadaparampil and Tiro, p. 952.

Assessing the Feasibility of an Online Module for Promoting Cancer Prevention Measures

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this pilot study were (1) to develop a cancer prevention module consisting of an animated video and a short questionnaire, (2) to assess new knowledge gained by the participants, and (3) to solicit feedback for improving the cancer prevention module.

METHODS

Volunteers who previously agreed to be contacted regarding research studies were approached via email. After completing the cancer prevention module, a list of cancer prevention recommendations was provided. Newly gained knowledge was assessed, and feedback was solicited.

RESULTS

Overall, 290 of 3165 individuals contacted completed the online module (9.2%), and 38.6% of the participants indicated that they learned something new about cancer prevention measures. A similar proportion, 41.4%, mentioned that they learned about measures that were recommended and due. Paradoxically, response rate was the lowest in the ≥50 year old age group although this group reported the highest rate of learning about new cancer prevention measures. Feedback was favorable in that 70.7% mentioned that the recommendations were helpful to them personally, 69.3% felt motivated to take action to reduce their risk of cancers, and 67% would recommend the online module to their friends and family.

CONCLUSION

We developed an online cancer prevention module which seems to be suitable for promoting cancer prevention measures as feedback was favorable, and new knowledge was gained. Future efforts will focus on using the module to promote cancer prevention measures to the general public particularly for the ≥50 year age group.