Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Residents of persistent poverty areas face elevated cancer risk factors, lower screening rates, and worse outcomes than those in non-persistently poor areas. The National Cancer Institute’s Persistent Poverty Initiative (PPI) was established in 2022 to advance cancer prevention and control in these areas through five funded research centers. We describe the community engagement approaches employed by PPI centers in cancer prevention research. Methods: A facilitated discussion was held with nine faculty from the five PPI centers and a federal program representative. The session was audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by multiple reviewers who consolidated notes and refined themes through group discussion. Themes were shared with all participants for verification, yielding five final themes. Results: Five themes emerged: (1) frameworks and models guiding community engagement, including Community-Based Participatory Research and place-based approaches; (2) engaging community residents through community advisory boards and multi-tiered engagement structures; (3) engaging community-based organizations as trusted intermediaries and primary funding recipients; (4) sharing research findings through accessible dissemination strategies; and (5) successes and challenges, including deepened community trust alongside barriers such as slow contracting, short funding cycles, and resource distribution. Conclusions: PPI centers perceived that sustained, trust-based community engagement meaningfully shapes cancer prevention research priorities and infrastructure. Consistent investment in co-leadership and community capacity-building were noted as essential to engaging underserved communities in equitable cancer prevention research and practice. Impact: These findings offer insights for fostering partnerships between persistent-poverty communities and cancer prevention research centers and highlight potential approaches cancer centers can employ to support community-academic partnerships.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raber et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: