Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 480

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Global Oncology Research and Training Collaborations Led by the National Cancer Institute (NCI)–Designated Cancer Centers: Results From the 2018 NCI/ASCO Global Oncology Survey of NCI-Designated Cancer Centers

Open access
Duncan, Kalina, Abudu, Rachel, Cira, Mishka K., Pyle, Doug H.M.·2019·Journal of Global Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute (NCI)–Designated Cancer Centers (NDCCs) are active in global oncology research and training, leading collaborations that contribute to the evidence to support global cancer control. To better understand global oncology activities led by NDCCs, the National Cancer Institute Center for Global Health (NCI-CGH) collaborated with ASCO to conduct the 2018 NCI/ASCO Global Oncology Survey of NDCCs. METHODS: The 70 NDCCs received a two-part survey that focused on global oncology programs at NDCCs and non–National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funded global oncology projects with an international collaborator led by the NDCCs. Sixty-five NDCCs responded to the survey, and 57 reported non–NIH-funded global oncology projects. Data were cleaned, coded, and analyzed by NCI-CGH staff. RESULTS: Thirty NDCCs (43%) report having a global oncology program, and 538 non–NIH-funded global oncology projects were reported. Of the NDCCs with global oncology programs, 17 report that trainees complete rotations outside the United States, and the same number enroll trainees from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In addition, 147 (28%) of the non–NIH-funded projects focused on capacity building or training, the second highest category after research. Of the 30 top project collaborator countries, 17 were LMICs. Compared with the NCI-funded international grant portfolio, non–NIH-funded global oncology projects were more likely to focus on prevention (12% NCI-funded v 20% non–NIH-funded); early detection, diagnosis, and prognosis (23% v 30%); and cancer control, survivorship, and outcomes research (13% v 22%). CONCLUSION: This survey shows that there is a substantial amount of global oncology research and training supported by NDCCs, and much of this is happening in LMICs. Results of the 2018 Global Oncology Survey can be used to foster opportunities for NDCCs to work collaboratively on activities and to share their findings with relevant stakeholders in their LMIC collaborator countries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jgo.19.11000

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 480

Metadata

Authors
Duncan, K., Abudu, R., Cira, M. K., & Pyle, D. H. M.
Venue
Journal of Global Oncology
Published
2019-10
Volume
5
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
1-1
ISSN
2378-9506 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2977497532
Cited by
480
References
0
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Global Oncology Research and Training Collaborations Led by the National Cancer Institute (NCI)–Designated Cancer Centers: Results From the 2018 NCI/ASCO Global Oncology Survey of NCI-Designated Cancer Centers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jgo.19.11000
The paper
Duncan, K., Abudu, R., Cira, M. K., & Pyle, D. H. M. (2019). Global Oncology Research and Training Collaborations Led by the National Cancer Institute (NCI)–Designated Cancer Centers: Results From the 2018 NCI/ASCO Global Oncology Survey of NCI-Designated Cancer Centers. Journal of Global Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jgo.19.11000

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.