Cancer control planning by international cancer control partnerships: an exploration of planning practices and resources in diverse settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the cancer burden increases worldwide and costs of cancer care continue to grow,1Jemal A Vineis P Bray F Torre L Forman D The cancer atlas.2nd edn. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA2014Google Scholar, 2Bray F Soerjomataram I The changing global burden of cancer: transitions in human development and implications for cancer prevention and control.in: Gelband H Jha P Sankaranarayanan R Horton S Volume 3: cancer. Disease Control Priorities. 3rd edn. World Bank, Washington, DC2015Crossref Google Scholar countries are seeking to understand how to effectively mitigate the dramatic health and economic consequences of cancer. Given that cancer is a large set of diseases requiring intervention at multiple stages, from prevention to multi-modal treatment and care for survivors and at end-of-life care, population-level cancer control is complex and necessitates substantial health-system capacity and investment. Additionally, many interventions require extensive involvement of non-health sectors. Comprehensive tobacco control programmes, for example, often include engagement from sectors as diverse as law enforcement, media, legislatures, and the business community.3Best A Clark PI Leischow SJ Trochim WMK Greater than the sum: systems thinking in tobacco control. Tobacco Control Monograph, No 18. US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD2007Google Scholar Such sizeable efforts rely on strategic planning and considerable forethought to maximise effectiveness, quality, safety, and sustainability. For this reason, WHO has consistently called for countries to develop national plans for cancer control. Most recently, a resolution for cancer prevention and control in the context of an integrated approach was adopted at the 2017 World Health Assembly.4World Health AssemblyCancer prevention and control in the context of an integrated approach. World Health Organization, Geneva2017: 1-6Google Scholar A Cancer Control Plan (CCP), at its most basic level, is a strategic plan to prevent and control cancer for a specific population (typically for a country, state, or province). Far more complicated is addressing a specific population's unique cancer burden, risk factor prevalence, unique culture and context, governance and health systems, and resources in a meaningful way within a CCP. Furthermore, a CCP must be successfully implemented to have its intended effect on health outcomes. Barriers to implementation necessitate a multisectoral, whole-of-society approach to CCP development and enactment that includes substantial and sustained commitment, flexibility in approaches, and cohesive collaboration.5IARCWorld cancer report 2014. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France2014Google Scholar The Toronto Global Cancer Control Conference, March 1–3, 2018, provides an excellent platform to explore diverse cancer control planning issues. At the conference, we will explore how cancer control planning has been approached in different settings and aim to examine four specific aspects of cancer control planning: (1) foundational elements of planning that are crucial to successful CCP implementation in most settings; (2) different structural, cultural, and resource contexts to identify some of the unique opportunities and challenges in cancer planning; (3) multisectoral collaboration in cancer planning and relevant outcomes; and (4) specific international and intranational partnerships, including the International Cancer Control Partnership6International Cancer Control Partnershiphttp://www.iccp-portal.orgGoogle Scholar, 7Torode J Collins K Kostelecky B Morton-Doherty R Stevens LM Vinson C The International Cancer Control Partnership: building capacity in cancer control planning.https://www.uicc.org/sites/main/files/atoms/files/BuildingCapacityICCP.pdfDate: 2015Google Scholar and the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer,8Fairclough L Hill J Bryant H Kitchen-Clarke L Accelerating knowledge to action: the pan-Canadian cancer control strategy.Curr Oncol. 2012; 19: 70-77Crossref PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar and how they provide cancer control planning support. The importance of context in comprehensive cancer prevention and control means that there will never be a one-size-fits-all approach to cancer control planning. Countries can, however, learn important lessons from one another about productive approaches, important considerations to address, questions to ask, and avenues used to overcome barriers. Partnership-building within countries, across regions, and around the world can provide ways to connect people with skills and knowledge to share relevant information and approaches. We declare no competing interests.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.054 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".