Prioritizing rural populations in state comprehensive cancer control plans: a qualitative assessment

• Type of Material: Article
• Authors: Rachel Hirschey, University of North Carolina; Catherine Rohweder, University of North Carolina; Whitney E Zahnd, University of Iowa; Jan M Eberth, Drexel University; Prajakta Adsul, University of New Mexico; Yue Guan, Emory University; Katherine Yeager, Emory University; Heidi Haines, University of Iowa; Paige E Farris, Oregon Health and Science University; Jennifer W Bea, University of Arizona; Andrea Dwyer, University of Colorado, Aurora; Purnima Madhivanan, University of Arizona; Radhika Ranganathan, University of South Carolina, Columbia; Aaron T Seaman, University of Iowa; Thuy Vu, University of Washington; Karen Wickersham, University of South Carolina; Maihan Vu, UNC CHAI Core; Randall Teal, UNC CHAI Core; Kara Giannone, UNC CHAI Core; Alison Hilton, UNC CHAI Core; Allison Cole, University of Washington; Jessica Y Islam, University of South Florida; Natoshia Askelson, University of Iowa
• Language: English
• Date: 2023-02-25
• Publisher: SPRINGER
• Publication Version: Final Published Version
• Copyright Statement: © The Author(s) 2023
• License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
• Final Published Version (URL): http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-023-01673-3
• Title of Journal or Parent Work: CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
• Start Page: 1
• End Page: 11
• Grant/Funding Information: This paper was published as part of a supplement sponsored by the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN), a thematic network of the Prevention Research Center Program and supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Work on this paper was funded in full by the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention, and the Health Promotion of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Cooperative Agreement Numbers: Colorado School of Public Health U48 DP006399U48, Emory University U48 DP006377, New York University School of Medicine - CUNY U48 DP006396, University of Arizona U48 DP006413, University of Iowa U48 DP006389, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill U48 DP006400, University of South Carolina U48 DP006401, University of Washington U48 DP006398, and NIMHD K23 MD015719-01 (Hirschey). The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of, nor an endorsement, by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or the U.S. Government.
• Keywords: Comprehensive cancer control; Cancer; Life Sciences & Biomedicine; Health disparities; Rural health; Public, Environmental & Occupational Health; Science & Technology; Oncology
• Research Categories: Health Sciences, Public Health; Health Sciences, Nursing; Health Sciences, Epidemiology

Abstract

Purpose: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) requires that states develop comprehensive cancer control (CCC) plans and recommends that disparities related to rural residence are addressed in these plans. The objective of this study was to explore rural partner engagement and describe effective strategies for incorporating a rural focus in CCC plans. Methods: States were selected for inclusion using stratified sampling based on state rurality and region. State cancer control leaders were interviewed about facilitators and barriers to engaging rural partners and strategies for prioritizing rural populations. Content analysis was conducted to identify themes across states. Results: Interviews (n = 30) revealed themes in three domains related to rural inclusion in CCC plans. The first domain (barriers) included (1) designing CCC plans to be broad, (2) defining “rural populations,” and (3) geographic distance. The second domain (successful strategies) included (1) collaborating with rural healthcare systems, (2) recruiting rural constituents, (3) leveraging rural community–academic partnerships, and (4) working jointly with Native nations. The third domain (strategies for future plan development) included (1) building relationships with rural communities, (2) engaging rural constituents in planning, (3) developing a better understanding of rural needs, and (4) considering resources for addressing rural disparities. Conclusion: Significant relationship building with rural communities, resource provision, and successful strategies used by others may improve inclusion of rural needs in state comprehensive cancer control plans and ultimately help plan developers directly address rural cancer health disparities.