[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 68 (Friday, April 9, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17384-17386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-8725]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control And Prevention
[INFO-99-14]
Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and
Recommendations
In compliance with the requirement of section 3506 (c) (2) (A) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention is providing opportunity for public comment on proposed
data collection projects. To request more information on the proposed
projects or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and
instruments, call the CDC Reports Clearance Officer on (404) 639-7090.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques for other
forms of information technology. Send comments to Seleda Perryman, CDC
Assistant Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road, MS-D24,
Atlanta, GA 30333. Written comments should be received within 60 days
of this notice.
Proposed Project
1. An Evaluation Study of Tuberculosis Control and Prevention
Measures Implemented in Large City and County Jails--New--The Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for HIV, STD,
TB Prevention (NCHSTP), Division of TB Elimination, Field Services
proposes to conduct a survey to determine the extent that jails have
implemented the 1996 recommendations of the Advisory Council for the
Elimination of Tuberculosis, Prevention and Control of Tuberculosis in
Correctional Facilities [MMWR 1996:45 (No. RR-8)]. The purpose of this
evaluation is to determine to what extent the recommendations have been
implemented and to identify barriers for implementation of the
recommendations. The objectives are to define the knowledge of the
recommendations among correctional staff, to identify barriers for the
adoption and implementation of the recommendations, and to initiate a
dialogue between public health and correctional officials on how to
utilize the study results for improving TB control and prevention in
the jails.
This project will assess the types and adequacy of the TB control
measures that are in place in jails. The first component of this
project is a survey of the largest jails to define the size of the TB
problem in their populations, to review the infection control
procedures that are in place, and determine the tracking mechanisms for
information concerning skin test results and completion of therapy. The
second component consists of on-site observation of the infection
control process to observe the processing and evaluation of inmates and
the infection control infrastructure (e.g., isolation procedures).
The evaluation project will be voluntary and only correctional
staff will participate; no prisoners will be interviewed or asked to
complete a written survey. The total cost to respondents is $0.00.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hours per
Respondents Number of Responses per response (in Total burden
respondents respondent hrs.) hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail survey including initial contact........... 50 1 2 100
Site visits..................................... 10 1 12 120
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... .............. .............. .............. 220
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Gene-Environment Interactions in Beryllium Sensitization and
Disease Among Current and Former Beryllium Industry Workers--NEW
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Beryllium
is a light weight metal with wide application in modern technology. The
size of the USA workforce at risk of beryllium exposure is estimated at
approximately 30,000, with exposed workers in primary production,
nuclear power and weapons, aerospace, scrap metal reclaiming, specialty
ceramics, and electronics industries. Demand for beryllium is growing
worldwide, which means that increasing numbers of workers are likely to
be exposed. An acute pneumonitis due to occupational exposure to
beryllium was common in the 1940s and 1950s, but has virtually
disappeared with improvements in work-site control measures. Even with
the improved controls, as many as 5% of currently-exposed workers will
develop chronic beryllium disease (CBD).
CBD is a chronic granulomatous lung disease mediated through a
poorly understood immunologic mechanism in workers who become
sensitized. Sensitization can be detected using a blood test, that is
used by the industry as a screening tool. The screening test for
sensitization was first reported in 1989, but many questions remain
about the natural history of sensitization and disease, as well as
exposure risk factors. Sensitized workers, identified through workplace
screening programs, undergo clinical diagnostic tests to determine
whether they have CBD. The proportion of sensitized workers who have
beryllium disease at initial clinical evaluation has varied from 41-
100% in different workplaces. Sensitized workers often develop CBD with
follow-up, but whether all sensitized workers will eventually develop
beryllium disease is unknown. Early diagnosis at the subclinical stage
and careful follow-up seems prudent in that CBD usually responds to
corticosteroid treatment. However, the efficacy of screening in
[[Page 17385]]
preventing adverse outcomes of the disease has not yet been evaluated.
While recent research has suggested that a genetic determinant of the
immune response could be a susceptibility factor, this has not been
well characterized.
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
wants to determine how beryllium workers and former workers develop
beryllium disease and how to prevent it. Through the proposed study,
NIOSH has the opportunity to contribute to the scientific understanding
of this disease in the context of environmental and genetic etiologic
factors. The goals of this investigation are to: (1) Determine the
incidence of beryllium sensitization or disease over a 6-year period;
(2) seek an association with exposure measurements; (3) identify a
genetic determinant of susceptibility to CBD; and (4) characterize that
genetic determinant to ascertain if it is associated with clinical
impairment or progression of disease. Through a greater understanding
of the environmental and genetic risk factors associated with the onset
and progression of CBD, NIOSH will be able to develop strategies for
both primary and secondary prevention applicable to beryllium-exposed
workers. The total cost to respondents is $0.00.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hours per
Respondents Number of Responses per response (in Total burden
respondents respondent hrs.) hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former Workers.............................. 175 1 0.5 87.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Health Message Development and Pretesting System--NEW--Office of
the Director, Office of Communications (OC). The Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) is the federal government's principal
agency for research on preventable causes of death and disease,
including dissemination of information for the prevention and control
of certain diseases and injuries. The CDC provides communication
between the agency and a variety of audiences, including Congress,
other executive agencies, state and local governments, scientific and
medical communities and institutions, academic institutions, voluntary
organizations, the press, the general public, and members of the public
diagnosed with certain diseases. Because CDC is mandated to communicate
with these audiences about disease prevention and control, and because
CDC programs are based on solid science, a science-based data
collection system for developing and pretesting audience messages is
necessary. Special circumstance surround the timeliness of this data
collection system.
First of all, CDC receives mandates from Congress to provide the
public with certain health information within a specified time frame.
Secondly, CDC may need to act quickly in response to media interest in
specific health-related subjects. The media can quickly escalate health
issues in the public's mind and indeed, they often drive communication
efforts on health issues that are acute, controversial, or threatening.
In these situations, CDC will need to quickly conduct research to learn
the best way to counteract misinformation or reinforce correct
information through a health communication campaign. Thirdly, CDC
prevention and control recommendations are often part of consensus
conferences with multiple sister agencies and private and public sector
partners. Because we need to translate the scientific messages that may
be released from a consensus conference or alliance meeting, CDC is
often in need of fast and effective ways of testing these message
translations for the public and the media on a very short timeline.
Finally, many CDC programs are working with private or public sector
partners who can provide paid placement for CDC messages. CDC needs an
empirically-driven system of comparing messages across audience groups
and across disease problems to assist partners with selecting the most
effective messages for partnerships. Partners look to CDC to provide
this leadership in communication science and research. This means that
CDC needs a database system that can house the aggregate data from all
message pretesting and allow researchers to compare messages to each
other and to standardized effectiveness scores.
It is critical to CDC's mission and mandates to provide credible
and effective messages to the many audiences we serve. Formative
evaluation provides CDC with the most accepted and powerful tool
available to make health messages as useful as possible for the
audiences we serve. Without formative evaluation, CDC staff and experts
will be unable to empirically predict the effectiveness of health
materials and messages, and CDC would not be able to predict when
messages are insensitive, offensive, or create unintended negative
effects.
CDC needs a system that can not only test program messages using an
empirical and accepted methodology, but also provides access to a
system that is fast and effective at reaching a wide variety of
audiences and provides comparison data for decision-making. The
proposed system will allow CDC to provide audiences with the best
scientific health information, in ways that are relevant to the
audience, based on empirical communication research, and in a timely
fashion.
This OMB submission is for message development and pretesting
research of 130 messages per year for each of three years. The testing
system will provide message development and pretesting research for 15
Centers, Institutes and Offices at CDC and across a wide range of
program areas.
Response burden for each type of formative research method are
summarized below. The estimated annual total burden hours are 6,945
across 130 different studies (CDC-wide). The total cost to respondents
is $0.00.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
studies Number of Response per Hours per Total burden
Formative research method conducted respondents respondent response (in hours
across CDC per study hrs.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Focus Groups \1\................ 59 48 1 1.5 4,248
Central Location Intercept 22 125 1 0.25 687
Interviews \2\.................
In-depth Interviews............. 34 15 1 1.0 510
Omnibus Surveys \3\............. 15 1,000 1 .10 1,500
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 17386]]
Total....................... 130 1,188 .............. .............. 6,945
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on the average number of 6 focus groups conducted by CDC and other organizations for each specific
health program with 8 people per group.
\2\ Based on the industry average of 125 people per pretest session.
\3\ Based on the industry average of 1,000 people per omnibus poll and 6 minutes of telephone interview time.
Dated: April 2, 1999.
Nancy Cheal,
Acting Associate Director for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 99-8725 Filed 4-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
