Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Aug 2;31(8):1521-1531.
doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0100.

Evaluating and Improving Cancer Screening Process Quality in a Multilevel Context: The PROSPR II Consortium Design and Research Agenda

Elisabeth F Beaber #  1 , Aruna Kamineni #  2 , Andrea N Burnett-Hartman  3 , Brian Hixon  3 , Sarah C Kobrin  4 , Christopher I Li  1 , Malia Oliver  2 , Katharine A Rendle  5 , Celette Sugg Skinner  6   7 , Kaitlin Todd  1 , Yingye Zheng  1 , Rebecca A Ziebell  2 , Erica S Breslau  4 , Jessica Chubak  2 , Douglas A Corley  8 , Robert T Greenlee  9 , Jennifer S Haas  10 , Ethan A Halm  11 , Stacey Honda  12 , Christine Neslund-Dudas  13 , Debra P Ritzwoller  3 , Joanne E Schottinger  14 , Jasmin A Tiro  6   7 , Anil Vachani  15 , V Paul Doria-Rose  4
Affiliations

Evaluating and Improving Cancer Screening Process Quality in a Multilevel Context: The PROSPR II Consortium Design and Research Agenda

Elisabeth F Beaber et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. .

Abstract

Background: Cancer screening is a complex process involving multiple steps and levels of influence (e.g., patient, provider, facility, health care system, community, or neighborhood). We describe the design, methods, and research agenda of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium. PROSPR II Research Centers (PRC), and the Coordinating Center aim to identify opportunities to improve screening processes and reduce disparities through investigation of factors affecting cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening in U.S. community health care settings.

Methods: We collected multilevel, longitudinal cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening process data from clinical and administrative sources on >9 million racially and ethnically diverse individuals across 10 heterogeneous health care systems with cohorts beginning January 1, 2010. To facilitate comparisons across organ types and highlight data breadth, we calculated frequencies of multilevel characteristics and volumes of screening and diagnostic tests/procedures and abnormalities.

Results: Variations in patient, provider, and facility characteristics reflected the PROSPR II health care systems and differing target populations. PRCs identified incident diagnoses of invasive cancers, in situ cancers, and precancers (invasive: 372 cervical, 24,131 colorectal, 11,205 lung; in situ: 911 colorectal, 32 lung; precancers: 13,838 cervical, 554,499 colorectal).

Conclusions: PROSPR II's research agenda aims to advance: (i) conceptualization and measurement of the cancer screening process, its multilevel factors, and quality; (ii) knowledge of cancer disparities; and (iii) evaluation of the COVID-19 pandemic's initial impacts on cancer screening. We invite researchers to collaborate with PROSPR II investigators.

Impact: PROSPR II is a valuable data resource for cancer screening researchers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential conflicts of interest: Dr. Vachani reports personal fees as a scientific advisor to the Lung Cancer Initiative at Johnson & Johnson and grants from MagArray, Inc., Broncus Medical, Inc., and Precyte, Inc. outside of the submitted work. Dr. Vachani is an advisory board member of the Lungevity Foundation (unpaid). Dr. Rendle reports a grant supported by funds from Pfizer outside of the submitted work. Dr. Neslund-Dudas reports a grant supported by funds from Genentech outside of the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:. Multiple levels of influence on the cancer screening process and exemplar elements or characteristics of these levels
Concepts adapted from Taplin, et al. and Zapka, et al.(2,3)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Beaber EF, Kim JJ, Schapira MM, Tosteson AN, Zauber AG, Geiger AM, et al. Unifying screening processes within the PROSPR consortium: a conceptual model for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107(6):djv120 doi 10.1093/jnci/djv120. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Taplin SH, Anhang Price R, Edwards HM, Foster MK, Breslau ES, Chollette V, et al. Introduction: Understanding and influencing multilevel factors across the cancer care continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2012;2012(44):2–10 doi 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgs008. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zapka JG, Taplin SH, Solberg LI, Manos MM. A framework for improving the quality of cancer care: the case of breast and cervical cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12(1):4–13. - PubMed
    1. Sensoy Özlem, DiAngelo Robin. Is Everyone Really Equal?: An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education. New York, NY: Teacher’s College Press; 2012.
    1. American Medical Association [Internet] Chicago: The Association; c2022 [cited 2022 Jan 01]. Availble from: <https://www.ama-assn.org/about/ama-center-health-equity/advancing-health...>.

Publication types