Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Apr;4(4):260-264.
doi: 10.1016/j.trecan.2018.02.002. Epub 2018 Mar 15.

New Horizons in Advocacy Engaged Physical Sciences and Oncology Research

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Review

New Horizons in Advocacy Engaged Physical Sciences and Oncology Research

Susan Samson et al. Trends Cancer. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

To address cancer as a multifaceted adaptive system, the increasing momentum for cross-disciplinary connectivity between cancer biologists, physical scientists, mathematicians, chemists, biomedical engineers, computer scientists, clinicians, and advocates is fueling the emergence of new scientific frontiers, principles, and opportunities within physical sciences and oncology. In parallel to highlighting the advances, challenges, and acceptance of advocates as credible contributors, we offer recommendations for addressing real world hurdles in advancing equitable partnerships among advocacy stakeholders.

Keywords: Advocacy engagement; convergent science; physical sciences in oncology.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. (A) Science Advocacy Engagement.
Together, researchers and advocates are cocreating system change interventions for revamping convergent research processes. Engaging with researchers, advocates codevelop guiding conceptual frameworks, educational strategies, training curriculum, toolkits, and instructional materials to accelerate innovation and advance science; envision a transdisciplinary setting where everyone has access to high quality science and advocacy interface opportunities; and match advocate expertise to research needs, including setting priorities/plans for early stage research and developing best engagement practice and metrics guidelines. (B) Mapping Science: Advocacy Exchange. Aligned from the start as vital catalysts of transdisciplinary innovation, the conceptual puzzle illustrates multimethod science advocacy engagement strategies. Advocates proactively participate in four areas: (i) research and programmatic support, (ii) education and outreach, (iii) policy and strategy, and (iv) representation and advisory. They apply four core principles that forge synergy with the emerging discipline of implementation science and the National Cancer Institute advocacy research working group recommendations (https://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/ncra/ARWG-recom.pdf): strategic innovation, collaborative execution, evidence based/inspirational decision-making, and ethical codes of conduct. (C) Vision and Convergence. Model depicting the intersections of physical sciences, biomarker discovery, emerging therapeutics, and advocacy that constitute a paradigm shift for biomedical research, one in which resources will be devoted to creating a vision supporting the value, impact, and benefit of advocate engagement, specifically in prediscovery early settings. Model format was adapted from [13].

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 1 article

  • Promoting Scientist-Advocate Collaborations in Cancer Research: Why and How.
    Salamone JM, Lucas W, Brundage SB, Holloway JN, Stahl SM, Carbine NE, London M, Greenwood N, Goyes R, Chisholm DC, Price E, Carlin R, Winarsky S, Baker KB, Maues J, Shajahan-Haq AN. Salamone JM, et al. Cancer Res. 2018 Oct 15;78(20):5723-5728. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-1600. Epub 2018 Aug 17. Cancer Res. 2018. PMID: 30120210 Free PMC article. Review.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback