ArticlePublic health genomics2026
A Value-Based Evaluation Framework for Guiding the Adoption and Scale-Up of Cancer Genomics Interventions.
Article in Public health genomics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCancer imposes a substantial burden characterized by high morbidity and mortality, reduced quality of life, and increased healthcare costs. This burden is expected to rise due to aging populations and persistent exposure to risk factors. Although emerging cancer technologies hold promise for improving clinical and economic outcomes across the care continuum, translating research findings into routine clinical practice remains a major bottleneck. The European Commission has prioritized addressing this challenge by fostering the rapid adoption of safer and more effective interventions. As part of its strategic plan, the European Union (EU) has launched research and innovation initiatives aimed at integrating cancer genomic technologies into public health and clinical systems. The CAN.HEAL evaluation framework presents a structured approach to classifying innovative cancer-related interventions by maturity level and to guide researchers and decision-makers in supporting adoption and scale-up efforts.
methodsThe evaluation framework was developed within the CAN.HEAL consortium, under the EU strategic cancer initiative that funded this research and innovation action, and agreed upon a consensus-based, iterative methodology including the stakeholders' perspectives. Key steps included landscape analysis, identification of key actions, structured discussions, expert consultations, and pilot testing of the assessment tool. The selected dimensions - grounded in equity, early health technology assessment, and innovation adoption principles - were hierarchically organized into subdomains, domains, and three overarching dimensions. A two-step scoring system was used to assess each key action across planning/definition and execution stages, with weighted final scores. The CAN.HEAL evaluation framework defines three adoption readiness levels, ranging from implementation at the healthcare provider level to integration across multiple healthcare systems. A structured 71-key action assessment tool, organized into three dimensions, was used to determine each intervention level: (1) equity - capacity building, research equity, and access; (2) impact assessment - early clinical development, cost considerations, and broader value; and (3) implementation, adoption, and scale-up readiness - desirability, feasibility, and viability from developer and adopter perspectives, including reimbursement pathways.
conclusionThe CAN.HEAL evaluation framework is designed to offer a systematic, evidence-informed approach to assessing the adoption readiness of cancer-related innovations. Further validation in cross-border, real-world settings is needed to ensure practical utility and scalability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.