There were particular talks which I found most helpful in the meeting, so I will highlight these ones in this blog. The first was by Dr. Larry Green.  His talk highlighted an amazing fact, that it takes 17 years to turn 14% of original research to benefit patient care. He advocated for more natural experiments, and used the example of the California and Massachusetts tobacco control programs using the tobacco tax. He stressed the many weaknesses in the paradigm of evidence-based medicine, and that we need to think outside of the box, since many of our interventions are not directly translatable to other cultures and socioeconomic situations. As a medical anthropologist and community health professor, the most relevant session to me was “Blending Methodologies to Optimize Cancer Disparities Research.” Dr. Rena Pasick, like Dr. Larry Green, questioned the generalizability of evidence-based interventions developed in controlled settings. She also stressed the importance of qualitative methods, that one should never undertake a RCT without a qualitative component. She also provided alternatives to the conventional RCT approach. For example, instead of performing a RCT on a colorectal cancer screening intervention, one might assess intervention efficacy by employing observations and in-depth interviews with participants of counseling sessions. Dr. Tony Onwuegbuzie presented an overview of mixed methods research approaches, and Dr. Sheba George read her paper on the social context of transnationalism. An important session in the Miami AACR conference was titled Global Cancer Research and Training.  I was particularly impressed with the presentation by Dr. Groesbeck Parham. He realized that the type of program he wanted to do could not be done as a parachute researcher and ended up moving to Zambia six years ago.  His network of clinics has successfully screened 50,000 women over four years for cervical cancer.  This is no small feat for a country with a very poor healthcare infrastructure. As I am also a cervical cancer researcher with experience in global health – Andean South America – these international research efforts are very important as we look forward to reduce the global cervical cancer burden. Finally, the two Sunday morning sessions on CER and Breast Cancer Disparities were further opportunities to hear about the latest in behavioral and secondary data analysis cancer disparities research. Dr. Electra Paskett presented a systematic review which was particularly informative as my own research involves developing cancer screening interventions for cervical cancer prevention. The take home message from her talk was that researchers need to compare the cost of interventions with effectiveness, tailor interventions to understudied, underserved minority populations, and create more interventions for prostate cancer. Dr. Debbie Erwin’s presentation was an excellent example of how a quantitative RCT might be strengthened with qualitative components to enhance trust in the research from the participant angle and be able to interpret the meaning of the study outcomes.