Abstract Background This study investigated the role of key individual- and community-level determinants to explore persisting racial/ethnic disparities in breast cancer stage at diagnosis in California during 1990 and 2000. Methods We examined socio-demographic determinants and changes in breast cancer stage at diagnosis in California during 1990 and 2000. In situ, local, regional, and distant diagnoses were examined by individual (age, race/ethnicity, and marital status) and community (income and education by zip code) characteristics. Community variables were constructed using the California Cancer Registry 1990-2000 and the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census. Results From 1990 to 2000, there was an overall increase in the percent of in situ diagnoses and a significant decrease in regional and distant diagnoses. Among white and Asian/Pacific Islander women, a significant percent increase was observed for in situ diagnoses, and significant decreases in regional and distant diagnoses. Black women had a significant decrease in distant -stage diagnoses, and Hispanic women showed no significant changes in any diagnosis during this time period. The percent increase of in situ cases diagnosed between 1990 and 2000 was observed even among zip codes with low income and education levels. We also found a significant percent decrease in distant cases for the quartiles with the most poverty and least education. Conclusions Hispanic women showed the least improvement in breast cancer stage at diagnosis from 1990 to 2000. Breast cancer screening and education programs that target under-served communities, such as the rapidly growing Hispanic population, are needed in California.

Background and purpose

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds training programs to increase the numbers and skills of scientists who obtain NIH research grants, but few programs have been rigorously evaluated. The sizeable recent NIH investment in developing programs to increase the diversity of the NIH-funded workforce, implemented through the Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), is unusual in that it also funds a Consortium-wide evaluation plan, which spans the activities of the 10 BUilding Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) awardees and the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN). The purpose of this article is to describe the evaluation design and innovations of the BUILD Program on students, faculty, and institutions of the 10 primarily undergraduate BUILD sites.

Key highlights of the project

Our approach to this multi-methods quasi-experimental longitudinal evaluation emphasizes stakeholder participation and collaboration. The evaluation plan specifies the major evaluation questions and key short- to long-term outcome measures (or Hallmarks of Success). The Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC) embarked on a comprehensive evaluation strategy by developing a set of logic models that incorporate the Hallmarks of Success and other outcomes that were collaboratively identified by the DPC. Data were collected from each BUILD site through national surveys from the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA (HERI), annual followup surveys that align with the HERI instruments, site visits and case studies, program encounter data ("tracker" data), and institutional data. The analytic approach involves comparing changes in Hallmarks (key outcomes) within institutions for biomedical students who participated versus those who did not participate in the BUILD program at each institution, as well as between institution patterns of biomedical students at the BUILD sites, and matched institutions that were not BUILD grantees. Case studies provide insights into the institutionalization of these new programs and help to explain the processes that lead to the observed outcomes.

Implications

Ultimately, the results of the consortium-wide evaluation will be used to inform national policy in higher education and will provide relevant examples of institutional and educational programmatic changes required to diversify the biomedical workforce in the USA.

Background

This study investigated the role of key individual- and community-level determinants to explore persisting racial/ethnic disparities in breast cancer stage at diagnosis in California during 1990 and 2000.

Methods

We examined socio-demographic determinants and changes in breast cancer stage at diagnosis in California during 1990 and 2000. In situ, local, regional, and distant diagnoses were examined by individual (age, race/ethnicity, and marital status) and community (income and education by zip code) characteristics. Community variables were constructed using the California Cancer Registry 1990-2000 and the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census.

Results

From 1990 to 2000, there was an overall increase in the percent of in situ diagnoses and a significant decrease in regional and distant diagnoses. Among white and Asian/Pacific Islander women, a significant percent increase was observed for in situ diagnoses, and significant decreases in regional and distant diagnoses. Black women had a significant decrease in distant -stage diagnoses, and Hispanic women showed no significant changes in any diagnosis during this time period. The percent increase of in situ cases diagnosed between 1990 and 2000 was observed even among zip codes with low income and education levels. We also found a significant percent decrease in distant cases for the quartiles with the most poverty and least education.

Conclusions

Hispanic women showed the least improvement in breast cancer stage at diagnosis from 1990 to 2000. Breast cancer screening and education programs that target under-served communities, such as the rapidly growing Hispanic population, are needed in California.

Introduction

Biosamples and associated clinical data accelerate translational and clinical research discoveries. A lack of high quality biosamples both stalls projects and limits research advances. In this study, we targeted a wide audience of University of California (UC) biobanking stakeholders who were either involved with the collection or the utilization of biosamples to assess the scope of their biobanking activities and their interest in virtual biobanking or cooperating in the formation of the UC-wide biorepository.

Materials and methods

Each institutional review board from the five UC medical campuses' provided a dataset of potential researchers involved with biobanking. Once identified, a brief six item web-based questionnaire was administered electronically to these researchers.

Results

Most survey participants (80%) responded "yes" (n = 348) that they were actively collecting biosamples for research, and 68% of participants indicated they would either definitely (30%, n = 131) or maybe (38%, n = 166) request biosample materials now or within the next year. An equal proportion of participants responded yes (42% or n = 184) and maybe (42% or n = 182) when asked if they would voluntarily contribute specimens to a UC-wide virtual biobank.

Discussion

The results presented above show high levels of support among UC biobanking stakeholders for both requesting material from and contributing material to a UC-wide virtual biobank. In addition, a considerable number of individual researchers on our five UC medical campuses are conducting biospecimen research (i.e., well over n = 435 respondents).

Introduction

Biosamples and associated clinical data accelerate translational and clinical research discoveries. A lack of high quality biosamples both stalls projects and limits research advances. In this study, we targeted a wide audience of University of California (UC) biobanking stakeholders who were either involved with the collection or the utilization of biosamples to assess the scope of their biobanking activities and their interest in virtual biobanking or cooperating in the formation of the UC-wide biorepository.

Materials and methods

Each institutional review board from the five UC medical campuses' provided a dataset of potential researchers involved with biobanking. Once identified, a brief six item web-based questionnaire was administered electronically to these researchers.

Results

Most survey participants (80%) responded "yes" (n = 348) that they were actively collecting biosamples for research, and 68% of participants indicated they would either definitely (30%, n = 131) or maybe (38%, n = 166) request biosample materials now or within the next year. An equal proportion of participants responded yes (42% or n = 184) and maybe (42% or n = 182) when asked if they would voluntarily contribute specimens to a UC-wide virtual biobank.

Discussion

The results presented above show high levels of support among UC biobanking stakeholders for both requesting material from and contributing material to a UC-wide virtual biobank. In addition, a considerable number of individual researchers on our five UC medical campuses are conducting biospecimen research (i.e., well over n = 435 respondents).