The Administrative Core for the Program Project will serve the coordinated needs of Projects 1, 2, and 3 and the other three Cores (B. Survey and SEER Data Collection, C. Communication and Dissemination, and D. Design and methodology), and will facilitate accomplishments of the overall objectives. The portfolio overview process will guide program execution, evaluation, and deliverables. The Administrative Core also will ensure enduring value of the P01 to CanSORT by deploying a professional and organizational strategy to optimize team cohesion and commitment.
Aims of the Core include:
Aim 1. Provide administrative and fiscal oversight, including infrastructure for management, team cohesion and communication, and integration of all Projects and Cores.
Aim 2. Provide quality assurance and evaluation processes and future strategies for the overall Program.
Aim 3. Manage and coordinate interactions and communication with the External Advisory Board (EAB), consultants, and public as needed. The Administrative Core supports the integration framework, which is based on four key principles: 1) projects address the theme of the program in complementary and synergistic ways;2) core aims support cross-project activities to maximize efficiency and effectiveness of the work plans and outcomes;3) each core proposes aims that advance innovative methods in oncology population sciences;and 4) core aims have enduring value in enhancing the CanSORT mission and objectives. The collection, integration, analysis, and interpretation of data from the projects and cores - gathered from multiple sources and locations - require consistent coordination and oversight of components. This Core will facilitate communication and integration of Leaders, Directors, and key personnel and provide administrative support and fiscal oversite for the entire program. It will provide infrastructure to assure and maintain shared information, goals, processes, and commitment among the program's key personnel. This Core will coordinate annual meetings of the research team and EAB, in addition to Project-Core cluster meetings every six months which will assemble Leaders from an individual project with Director(s) of Core B, C, or D, as relevant to the project, to concentrate on study content.

Public Health Relevance

The Administrative Core will provide overall oversight, guidance and support to the project and core activities in this program. In addition, in order to ensure the enduring value of the P01 to CanSORT, a professional and organizational strategy will be deployed to optimize team cohesion and commitment. This strategy will be used to facilitate team research for this program and future CanSORT research.

National Institute of Health (NIH)
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Research Program Projects (P01)
Project #
Application #
Study Section
Special Emphasis Panel (ZCA1-RPRB-B (M1))
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
Budget End
Support Year
Fiscal Year
Total Cost
Indirect Cost
University of Michigan Ann Arbor
Ann Arbor
United States
Zip Code
Martinez, Kathryn A; Resnicow, Ken; Williams, Geoffrey C et al. (2016) Does physician communication style impact patient report of decision quality for breast cancer treatment? Patient Educ Couns 99:1947-1954
Wallner, Lauren P; Martinez, Kathryn A; Li, Yun et al. (2016) Use of Online Communication by Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer During the Treatment Decision Process. JAMA Oncol 2:1654-1656
Kerber, Kevin A; Meurer, William J; Brown, Devin L et al. (2015) Stroke risk stratification in acute dizziness presentations: A prospective imaging-based study. Neurology 85:1869-78
Martinez, Kathryn A; Kurian, Allison W; Hawley, Sarah T et al. (2015) How can we best respect patient autonomy in breast cancer treatment decisions? Breast Cancer Manag 4:53-64
Katz, Steven J; Kurian, Allison W; Morrow, Monica (2015) Treatment Decision Making and Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer: Mainstreaming Mutations. JAMA 314:997-8
Shumway, Dean; Griffith, Kent A; Jagsi, Reshma et al. (2015) Psychometric properties of a brief measure of autonomy support in breast cancer patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 15:51
Katz, Steven J (2014) Treatment decision aids are unlikely to cut healthcare costs. BMJ 348:g1172
Resnicow, Ken; Abrahamse, Paul; Tocco, Rachel S et al. (2014) Development and psychometric properties of a brief measure of subjective decision quality for breast cancer treatment. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 14:110
Katz, Steven J; Belkora, Jeffrey; Elwyn, Glyn (2014) Shared decision making for treatment of cancer: challenges and opportunities. J Oncol Pract 10:206-8
Katz, Steven J; Hawley, Sarah (2014) Patient-physician shared decision making--reply. JAMA 311:864

Showing the most recent 10 out of 12 publications