Abstract B5: Region Five GMaP/BMaP Network: Preliminary findings from the comprehensive needs assessment principal investigator survey
Authors: Fleisher Linda , Norbeck Carrie , Simon Melissa , de la Riva Erika , Kandadai Venk , Giannoumis Anthony , Davis Stacy N. , Louden Delroy , Schink Julian , Beck Robert 
Published: June 2012

Abstract
Background: The Region Five GMaP/BMaP Network is a regional partnership representing 18 NCI funded institutions charged with the development and implementation of a comprehensive needs assessment (CNAT). The goal of the principle investigator (PI) component of the CNAT was to capture in-depth PI opinion on necessary elements to successful health disparities research, barriers to success and required funding and infrastructure elements needed to alleviate those barriers. In addition, we hoped to obtain specific recommendations for our network's development to foster successful research collaborations amongst our many institutions and the diverse populations we serve.
Methods: The CNAT consisted of a mixed methods approach utilizing four instruments: A principal Investigator Survey and PI Interview and a Biospecimen Facility Survey and Interview. This presentation focuses on preliminary findings from the PI Survey. The surveys were conducted online by PI's during the months of March and April 2011. Qualitative interviews will be conducted between July and August 2011. The PI survey consisted of 48 distinct questions, with affiliated subset questions that covered seven core areas: cancer health disparities research/community, minority biospecimens collection, clinical trials recruitment and retention, bioinformatics/advanced & emerging technology, training, visioning the future; and network analysis.
Results: PI online survey was completed by 14 of 18 region five institutions, a 77.8% completion rate. Preliminary findings show our region's investigator expertise is in the areas of CBPR, working with community based organizations, and training CHD researchers, with 84% (11/13) reporting collaborations with institutions and community partners. Most of the populations focused on among the PI's mirrors the populations in institution service areas. Forty-six percent (6/13) of institutions reported having implemented outreach or education strategies in the community to promote biospecimens research, while 69.2% (9/13) reported projects with the aim to improve accrual of minority patients into clinical trials. Four PI's focus 50–100% of their GMaP effort on health disparities programs; while five PI's focus between 50–100% of their GMaP group effort on health disparities research. 84% of PI's collaborate with others to conduct CHD research and community outreach. The most popular areas of CHD research are barriers to cancer screening, health literacy, and cancer (breast, prostate, cervical, and lung).
Conclusions: Region Five has significant experience conducting community-based research and community education programs to increase minority/medically underserved population's participation in research. There are opportunities for collaboration among principal investigators and biospecimen facilities around minority biospecimen collection efforts. Region Five has established a formal network called the Cancer Disparities Research Network (CDRN) and is establishing a network website. A result of this preliminary network is the continuation of the collaboration and identification of potential health disparities projects. We anticipate implementing Cancer 102 education and training on research participation, biospecimen donation/biobanking and genetics across our institutions.
Citation Information: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011;20(10 Suppl):B5.