Cancer Causes & Control

, Volume 29, Issue 3, pp 363–369 | Cite as

Participatory implementation science to increase the impact of evidence-based cancer prevention and control

  • Shoba RamanadhanEmail author
  • Melinda M. Davis
  • Rebecca Armstrong
  • Barbara Baquero
  • Linda K. Ko
  • Jennifer C. Leng
  • Ramzi G. Salloum
  • Nicole A. Vaughn
  • Ross C. Brownson
Brief report


It is critical to accelerate the integration of evidence-based programs, practices, and strategies for cancer prevention and control into clinical, community, and public health settings. While it is clear that effective translation of existing knowledge into practice can reduce cancer burden, it is less clear how best to achieve this. This gap is addressed by the rapidly growing field of implementation science. Given that context influences and is influenced by implementation efforts, engaging stakeholders in the co-production of knowledge and solutions offers an opportunity to increase the likelihood that implementation efforts are useful, scalable, and sustainable in real-world settings. We argue that a participatory implementation science approach is critical, as it supports iterative, ongoing engagement between stakeholders and researchers to improve the pathway between research and practice, create system change, and address health disparities and health equity. This article highlights the utility of participatory implementation science for cancer prevention and control research and addresses (a) the spectrum of participatory research approaches that may be of use, (b) benefits of participatory implementation science, and (c) key considerations for researchers embarking on such projects.


Implementation science Community-based participatory research Participatory implementation science Cancer prevention and control Evidence-based practice 



Funding was provided by National Cancer Institute (Grant Nos. 5R25CA171994 and K07CA211971).


  1. 1.
    Colditz GA, Wolin KY, Gehlert S (2012) Applying what we know to accelerate cancer prevention. Sci Transl Med 4(127):127rv4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Green LW et al (2009) Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health. Annu Rev Public Health 30:151–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Green LW et al (2014) Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization and integration. Front Public Health Serv Syst Res 3(1):3PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Glasgow RE, Emmons K (2007) How can we increase translation of research into practice? Types of evidence needed. Annu Rev Public Health 28:413–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diez Roux AV (2011) Complex systems thinking and current impasses in health disparities research. Am J Public Health 101(9):1627–1634CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Holmes BJ et al (2012) Systems thinking in dissemination and implementation research. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK (eds) Dissemination and implementation research in health. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 175–191Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tabak RG et al (2012) Bridging research and practice: models for dissemination and implementation research. Am J Prev Med 43(3):337–350CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emmons KM, Colditz GA (2017) Realizing the potential of cancer prevention-the role of implementation science. New Engl J Med 376(10):986–990CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Israel BA et al (2003) Critical issues in developing and following community based participatory research principles. In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N (eds) Community based participatory research for health. Wiley, San Francisco, pp 53–76Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gagliardi AR et al (2016) Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review. Implement Sci 11(1):38CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Minkler M, Salvatore AL, Chang C (2012) Participatory approaches for study design and analysis in dissemination and implementation research. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK (eds) Dissemination and implementation research in health. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wallerstein N, Duran B (2003) The conceptual, historical, and practice roots of community based participatory research and related participatory traditions. In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N (eds) Community based participatory research for health. Wiley, San Francisco, pp 27–52Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (2015) What we mean by engagement. October 12. Accessed 23 February
  14. 14.
    The Examining Community-Institutional Partnerships for Prevention Research Group (2006) Developing and sustaining community-based participatory research partnerships: a skill-building curriculum. Accessed 23 February 2017
  15. 15.
    Minkler M, Salvatore AL (2012) Participatory approaches for study design and analysis in dissemination and implementation research. In: Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK (eds) Dissemination and implementation research in health. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 192–212Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Biggs S (1989) Resource-poor farmer participation in research: a synthesis of experiences from national agricultural research systems. OFCOR-Comparative study (Netherlands) no. 3Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oetzel J et al (2015) Establishing the psychometric properties of constructs in a community-based participatory research conceptual model. Am J Health Promot 29(5):e188–e202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Simonds VW et al (2013) Community-based participatory research: its role in future cancer research and public health practice. Prev Chronic Dis 10:120205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gehlert S, Coleman R (2010) Using community-based participatory research to ameliorate cancer disparities. Health Social Work 35(4):302–309CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Davis MM et al (2014) Engaging the underserved: a process model to mobilize rural community health coalitions as partners in translational research. Clin Transl Sci 7(4):300–306CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Davis MM et al (2017) Milk options observation (MOO): a mixed-methods study of chocolate milk removal on beverage consumption and student/staff behaviors in a rural elementary school. J Sch Nurs 33(4):285–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ramanadhan S, Aronstein D, Martinez-Dominguez V, Viswanath K Building capacity for evidence-based program planning in community-based organizations:the impact of trainee engagement (unpublished manuscript)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wallerstein N, Duran B (2008) The theoretical, historical, and practice roots of CBPR. In: Minkler M, Wallerstein N (eds) Community-based participatory research for health: from process to outcomes. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 25–46Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wallerstein N, Duran B (2010) Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: the intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. Am J Public Health 100(Suppl 1):S40–S46CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pettman TL et al (2013) Using evidence in health promotion in local government: contextual realities and opportunities. Health Promot J Aust 24(1):72–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brownson RC et al (2013) Designing for dissemination among public health researchers: findings from a national survey in the United States. Am J Public Health 103(9):1693–1699CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Green LW (2008) Making research relevant: if it is an evidence-based practice, where’s the practice-based evidence?. Fam Pract 25(Suppl 1):i20–i24 )CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Batalden M et al (2015) Coproduction of healthcare service. BMJ Qual Saf. bmjqs-2015-004315Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hawe P et al (1997) Multiplying health gains: the critical role of capacity-building within health promotion programs. Health Policy 39(1):29–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ramanadhan S, Viswanath K (2018) Engaging communities to improve health: models, evidence, and the participatory knowledge translation (PaKT) framework. In: Fisher EB et al (eds) Principles and concepts of behavioral medicine: a global handbook. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Prasad V, Ioannidis JP (2014) Evidence-based de-implementation for contradicted, unproven, and aspiring healthcare practices. Implement Sci 9(1):1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    National Center for Advancing Translational Science (2017) About the CTSA Program. Accessed 12 May 2017
  33. 33.
    Lobb R, Colditz GA (2013) Implementation science and its application to population health. Annu Rev Public Health 34:235CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McGinnis PB et al (2010) Transitioning from CHIP to CHIRP: blending community health development with community-based participatory research. Fam Community Health 33(3):228–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Landsverk J et al (2018) Design and analysis in dissemination and implementation research. In: Brownson R, Colditz G, Proctor E (eds) Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 201–228Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Curran GM et al (2012) Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care 50(3):217CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shoba Ramanadhan
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Melinda M. Davis
    • 3
  • Rebecca Armstrong
    • 4
  • Barbara Baquero
    • 5
  • Linda K. Ko
    • 6
  • Jennifer C. Leng
    • 7
    • 8
  • Ramzi G. Salloum
    • 9
  • Nicole A. Vaughn
    • 10
    • 11
    • 12
  • Ross C. Brownson
    • 13
    • 14
  1. 1.Center for Community-Based ResearchDana-Farber Cancer InstituteBostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Social and Behavioral SciencesHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public HealthBostonUSA
  3. 3.Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network, Department of Family Medicine and OHSU-PSU School of Public HealthOregon Health & Sciences UniversityPortlandUSA
  4. 4.Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global HealthThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  5. 5.Department of Community and Behavioral Health, College of Public HealthUniversity of Iowa Prevention Research Center, University of IowaIowa CityUSA
  6. 6.Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Department of Health ServicesUniversity of Washington School of Public HealthSeattleUSA
  7. 7.Immigrant Health and Cancer Disparities Service, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Department of MedicineMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  8. 8.Department of Healthcare Policy and ResearchWeill Cornell Medical CollegeNew YorkUSA
  9. 9.Department of Health Outcomes and Policy, College of MedicineUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  10. 10.Department of Health and Exercise Science, School of Health ProfessionsRowan UniversityGlassboroUSA
  11. 11.Department of Biomedical SciencesCooper University Medical School of Rowan UniversityCamdenUSA
  12. 12.Department of Family MedicineRowan University School of MedicineGlassboroUSA
  13. 13.Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown SchoolWashington UniversitySt. LouisUSA
  14. 14.Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Alvin J. Siteman Cancer CenterWashington University School of Medicine, Washington UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations