About Final Report Agenda Workshops Speaker Presentations Minutes Breakout Summaries Photos Contacts

Workshop Themes and Descriptions

Summit 07 will segment programs by regions into four tracks to address the five cross-cutting themes. Each workshop will feature a small panel of speakers sharing best practices and lessons learned through presentations and case studies. After the presentations and a brief question-and-answer period, the facilitator will lead discussion of questions that will focus on critical elements necessary for a successful program, information needed for program snapshots, and program expectations/incentives for increased collaboration related to each theme. The workshops will address issues across populations, research disciplines, and the cancer continuum.

Collaborations & Partnerships

Interdisciplinary partnerships among research, academic, and community organizations that serve racial/ethnic minority and underserved populations are essential to improve the study of cancers that affect these groups and to increase involvement of such entities and populations in scientific research. Workshops under this theme will showcase programs that have established effective and mutually beneficial collaborations and partnerships among cancer centers, academic institutions, community-based organizations, Federal agencies, students, and community members with the common goal of reducing cancer health disparities.

Key topics of discussion include:

• Working with non-traditional partners such as corporations, insurance companies, and pharmaceuticals.
• Creating partnerships for the support and development of sustainable community-based networks for participatory research in areas of high cancer disparities.
• Providing regional opportunities for program networking across research disciplines.
• Enhancing the likelihood of the adoption of beneficial research results at the individual and community levels.
• Building and sustaining academic-community partnerships and community trust.
• Addressing the needs of trans-disciplinary research teams to tackle complex scientific problems and questions.

Strong partnership strategies are vital to the continuum of cancer care, and programs must be fostered that cultivate collaborative relationships between diverse representatives among decision-makers, community members, researchers, and other stakeholders.

Questions to consider:

1. What novel and effective approaches have been successful in developing mutually beneficially partnerships that incorporate diverse leadership and demonstrate significant community involvement?
2. What factors have been crucial in facilitating partnerships to bridge diverse populations by their commonalities?
3. How do programs address barriers to developing and sustaining true diverse collaborations that link different segments (health care, social services, etc.) that advocate for minority and underserved health?
4. How do programs balance rigorous scientific standards with substantial community involvement?
5. What are the program benefits of encouraging collaborations among researchers who work with minority and underserved populations?
6. What are the best practices for forging new partnerships and expanding outreach to minority communities and other medically underserved communities?
7. What steps are needed to increase the availability of technologies and facilities conducive to producing more effective collaborative processes?

Communications & Bioinformatics [Back To Top]

High-speed computer networks are vital to biomedical research, yet the infrastructure supporting network connectivity remains unevenly distributed. Workshops will examine ways to implement networks that support research and communication. They will also serve to identify key needs and priorities for future infrastructure development.

Computer networks underpin virtually all aspects of biomedical research, from the capture, storage, and analysis of data to the dynamic modeling of disease epidemics. Researchers increasingly turn to computing power to conduct modeling and simulations of biological systems. Powerful computers alone are not enough to exploit those opportunities. A comprehensive supporting infrastructure (often termed cyber infrastructure) must be in place—one that integrates data-gathering facilities, computing hardware, data analysis and informatics tools, interoperable software and middleware, and expertise needed to develop robust software applications and build, manage, and utilize networks.

Network connectivity is increasingly important, especially for trans-disciplinary team science, because it allows collaborative sharing of valuable data, expertise, and other research resources at optimal rates. Networks facilitate research collaboration and sharing of resources within geographical areas and beyond and also provide access for the conduct of telemedicine.

Academic health centers in some locations, as well as many physicians' offices, rural hospitals, and clinics, have poor connectivity, limiting their ability to participate in research networks. Shortcomings extend beyond the physical network, including adoption of policies and procedures for seamless interoperability and data standards and security for all participating sites. Overcoming these barriers will greatly expand access to research tools and health information for physicians, patients, and researchers, both in academic health centers and wherever researchers conduct community-based research. Enhanced connectivity will also broaden access to education and training programs that further national efforts to strengthen the clinical research workforce.

Questions to consider:

1. What steps are needed to enhance the existing network infrastructure to adequately support interdisciplinary research and training of junior faculty and community program staff?
2. What processes are required for the existing network infrastructure to facilitate interaction among grantees in geographical proximity and nationally?
3. How can programs utilize their existing resources to increase the capacity of the existing network infrastructure to bridge academic health centers and community health care providers in order to foster and stimulate community-based clinical and translational research?
4. What are the needs of institutions in urban, rural, or remote areas, and how can these needs be addressed to enhance opportunities for communication and broader inclusion in biomedical and behavioral research?
5. How will the costs of developing and sustaining network infrastructure that meets anticipated research needs and promotes collaboration be supported?

Community Engagement [Back To Top]

Addressing health disparities will require a collaborative approach to research that equitably engages all partners in the research process and recognizes the unique and considerable strengths that each partner brings to this process. Workshops will focus on barriers to and enablers of effective academic-community partnerships for community-based participatory research (CBPR) to address cancer health disparities. The goals of the workshops are to identify (1) strategies and best practices for conducting collaborative, community participatory clinical and translational research, particularly in minority communities and other medically underserved communities where cancer health disparities persist; (2) strategies and best practices for recruitment and retention of research participants; and (3) core infrastructure needs in communities that will encourage and enable community participation in research.

Key topics of discussion include:

• Addressing racial, ethnic, and geographic disparities in clinical and translational research participation.
• Building community buy-in and trust to enhance recruitment and retention of research participants.
• Collaborative development of practical research protocols that work effectively in community health care settings and address questions of relevance to the community.
• Developing versatile and sustainable core research infrastructure (e.g., personnel, information technology, and informatics tools) to enable and encourage community participation.
• Leveraging existing infrastructure, including increasingly advanced clinical information systems, residing in safety-net community health center networks to facilitate CBPR.
• Sharing effective approaches in designing community action trainings to promote community participation in research.

Questions to consider:
Barriers/enablers of effective academic-community research partnerships

1. What are some of the key enablers of CBPR?
2. How do we develop/disseminate guidelines and best practices for CBPR?
3. What are some key barriers to community health care providers and community participation in research, and how can academic institutions overcome these barriers?

Facilitating collaborative development of practical research protocols

1. What are some best practices for focusing research questions on health issues of greatest relevance to the communities at greatest risk?
2. How do we develop intervention strategies that incorporate community norms and values into scientific approaches?
3. What are the best practices for increasing accurate and culturally-sensitive interpretation of research findings?

Core infrastructure requirements for research in community settings

1. What are the core research infrastructure needs for researchers, community health providers, and community participants?
2. How do we identify existing infrastructure and leverage the infrastructure to increase CBPR?

Promoting educational training for community-based organization partners

1. What are some successful examples from training modules for non-researchers on participating in CBPR to address cancer health disparities in their region?
2. How do we facilitate the collaboration of regional trans-disciplinary research teams to work with the community to identify new opportunities and training needs in eliminating cancer disparities?

Managing and Sustaining Programs [Back To Top]

Workshops under this theme will focus on critical elements needed to develop a core process to ensure program continuity and identify and secure reliable resources to meet program obligations. Programs are constantly facing challenges in effectively moving research activities forward that include a lack of funding and resources and increased scrutiny of effectiveness.

Evidence suggests that health policy is critical to sustaining program efforts over the long term. Factors such as financial resources, program duration, and the process of project negotiation are a matter of policy. Grantees will discuss examining existing health policy models and determining how they may be adapted to address cancer health disparities-related gaps in the community, translate research findings into policy, and further engage local, state, and Federal policymakers.

Key topics of discussion include:

• Identifying the challenges in developing, implementing, and sustaining cancer health disparities programs.
• Working with individuals from multiple backgrounds to be able to interface and identify the needs, challenges, and strengths of the community in closing the cancer health disparities gap.
• Sharing effective processes to secure sufficient funding to implement new research policies and programs and to improve existing activities.

Questions to Consider:

1. How do we address inadequate funding issues to fully support infrastructure required to perform cancer health disparities research?
2. What program examples have been instrumental in monitoring adoption and implementation of legislation and recommendations to reduce cancer health disparities?
3. How have programs worked with local legislation to evaluate local policies?
4. How do we increase the potential for translation of evidence-based research into sustainable community change that can be disseminated more broadly?
5. What are successful processes that programs may adopt to effectively use research to influence legislation?
6. What types of data and training are needed by decision-makers to implement public policy by creating legislation and regulation to eliminate cancer health disparities?

Training [Back To Top]

These workshops will address challenges and enhancement strategies to increase the recruitment, retention, and promotion of minority and underserved investigators in cancer health disparities research. Reducing and eliminating cancer related health disparities requires a well-trained, collaborative group of trans-disciplinary researchers and it is essential to provide specific training targeting senior researchers and junior investigators relating to the following points:

Senior Researchers / Junior Investigators

• Recruit and mentor junior minority investigators.
• Increase knowledge of the peer review process and how it plays an essential role in increasing the competitive pool of investigators working with diverse populations.
• Recognize the challenges and strengths confronted by the new investigator in identifying gaps in the field of cancer health disparities research.

Key topics of discussion include:

• Describing the current pool of minority and underserved investigators in the area of cancer health disparities and why they are needed.
• Identifying challenges faced in both recruitment and retention of minority and underserved researchers in health disparities.
• Describing currently funded NIH programs that are available to facilitate increased recruitment and retention of minority and underserved investigators.
• Discussing study section participation and sharing approaches to promote peer review involvement.

Questions to Consider:

1. What are the critical training gaps and needs for members of trans-disciplinary regional cancer health disparities teams?
2. How do we encourage and promote the participation of cancer health disparities researchers on review committees to learn grant preparation nuances (e.g., individual reviewer qualifications and common critiques of research applications)?
3. How do we engage in cross-talk and planning within a region to identify a recruitment pool of new investigators as well as training and recruitment/incentive needs?
4. How do we ensure the inclusion of a more diversified pool of investigators to fill identified research gaps in new and emerging areas of science?
5. What are some best practices to work with junior researchers in documenting the process to find the appropriate institution, mentors, and funding opportunities?