American Journal of Preventive Medicine (AM J PREV MED)

Publisher: American College of Preventive Medicine; Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine, Elsevier Masson

Journal description

The American Journal of Preventive Medicine is the official journal of the American College of Preventive Medicine and the Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine. It publishes articles in the areas of prevention research, teaching, practice and policy. Original research is published on interventions aimed at the prevention of chronic and acute disease and the promotion of individual and community health. Of particular emphasis are papers that address the primary and secondary prevention of important clinical, behavioral and public health issues such as injury and violence, infectious disease, women's health, smoking, sedentary behaviors and physical activity, nutrition, diabetes, obesity, and alcohol and drug abuse. Papers also address educational initiatives aimed at improving the ability of health professionals to provide effective clinical prevention and public health services. Papers on health services research pertinent to prevention and public health are also published. The journal also publishes official policy statements from the two co-sponsoring organizations, review articles, media reviews, and editorials. Finally, the journal periodically publishes supplements and special theme issues devoted to areas of current interest to the prevention community. For information on the American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM) and the Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine (ATPM), visit their web sites at the following URLs: and

Current impact factor: 4.53

Impact Factor Rankings

2015 Impact Factor Available summer 2016
2014 Impact Factor 4.527
2013 Impact Factor 4.281
2012 Impact Factor 3.945
2011 Impact Factor 4.044
2010 Impact Factor 4.11
2009 Impact Factor 4.235
2008 Impact Factor 3.766
2007 Impact Factor 3.489
2006 Impact Factor 3.497
2005 Impact Factor 3.167
2004 Impact Factor 3.188
2003 Impact Factor 3.256
2002 Impact Factor 2.63
2001 Impact Factor 2.064
2000 Impact Factor 2.192
1999 Impact Factor 1.442
1998 Impact Factor 1.199
1997 Impact Factor 0.995
1996 Impact Factor 0.829
1995 Impact Factor 0.856
1994 Impact Factor 0.617
1993 Impact Factor 0.549
1992 Impact Factor 0.646

Impact factor over time

Impact factor

Additional details

5-year impact 5.40
Cited half-life 6.70
Immediacy index 1.14
Eigenfactor 0.04
Article influence 2.12
Website American Journal of Preventive Medicine website
Other titles American journal of preventive medicine
ISSN 0749-3797
OCLC 11120856
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publisher details

Elsevier Masson

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author can archive a post-print version
  • Conditions
    • Authors pre-print on any website, including arXiv and RePEC
    • Author's post-print on author's personal website immediately
    • Author's post-print on open access repository after an embargo period of between 12 months and 48 months
    • Permitted deposit due to Funding Body, Institutional and Governmental policy or mandate, may be required to comply with embargo periods of 12 months to 48 months
    • Author's post-print may be used to update arXiv and RepEC
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Must link to publisher version with DOI
    • Author's post-print must be released with a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License
    • Publisher last reviewed on 01/05/2015
    • 'Elsevier Masson' is an imprint of 'Elsevier'
  • Classification
    ​ green

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) can provide insights into cancer survivors' physical and mental functioning, their social relationships, and perceptions of their health and well-being. Understanding factors associated with HRQOL may help identify those who are at greater risk for diminished functioning and improve targeted delivery of health promotion programs. This analysis sought to assess sociodemographic and medical factors associated with HRQOL among colorectal cancer survivors and factors that may put survivors at risk for poor functioning. In addition, associations between BMI and physical activity and HRQOL were explored. Methods: Data from a cross-sectional study of health behaviors among 593 long-term colorectal cancer survivors recruited through the California Cancer Registry in early 2010 were analyzed in late 2014 to early 2015. Multivariable linear and logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with physical, mental, and overall HRQOL. Results: The mean physical and mental HRQOL scores of survivors were 46.88 and 42.28, respectively, and lower than the population norm (50). Being older, having more comorbid conditions, and having had a recurrence were associated with lower physical and overall HRQOL, whereas being physically active was associated with higher physical and overall HRQOL. Conclusions: Findings highlight the need to encourage healthcare providers to promote physical activity among sedentary cancer survivors, even at modest levels. In addition, lower mental HRQOL scores may indicate a greater need to screen cancer survivors for psychosocial issues and link them with appropriate services.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S518-S527. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.007
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: One of six priorities of CDC's National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) is to address the needs of cancer survivors within the local population served by individually funded states, tribes, and territories. This report examines cancer survivorship activities implemented in five NCCCP grantees, which have initiated evidence-based activities outlined in A National Action Plan for Cancer Survivorship: Advancing Public Health Strategies (NAP). Methods: NCCCP action plans, submitted annually to CDC, from 2010 to 2014 were reviewed in February 2015 to assess implementation of cancer survivorship activities and recommended strategies consistent with the NAP. Four state-level and one tribal grantee with specific activities related to one of each of the four NAP strategies were chosen for inclusion. Brief case reports describing the initiation and impact of implemented activities were developed in collaboration with each grantee program director. Results: New Mexico, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington state, and Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa programs each implemented activities in surveillance and applied research; communication, education, and training; programs, policies, and infrastructure; and access to quality care and services. Conclusions: This report provides examples for incorporating cancer survivorship activities within Comprehensive Cancer Control programs of various sizes, demographic makeup, and resource capacity. New Mexico, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington state, and Fond Du Lac Band developed creative cancer survivorship activities that meet CDC recommendations. NCCCP grantees can follow these examples by implementing evidence-based survivorship interventions that meet the needs of their specific populations.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S536-S542. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.011
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Long-term objectives associated with cancer survivors have been suggested by Healthy People 2020, including increasing the proportion of survivors living beyond 5 years after diagnosis and improving survivors’ mental and physical health-related quality of life. Prior to reaching these objectives, several intermediate steps must be taken to improve the physical, social, emotional, and financial well-being of cancer survivors. Public health has a role in developing strategic, actionable, and measurable approaches to facilitate change at multiple levels to improve the lives of survivors and their families. The social ecological model has been used by the public health community as the foundation of multilevel intervention design and implementation, encouraging researchers and practitioners to explore methods that promote internal and external changes at the individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy levels. The survivorship community, including public health professionals, providers, policymakers, survivors, advocates, and caregivers, must work collaboratively to identify, develop, and implement interventions that benefit cancer survivors. The National Action Plan for Cancer Survivorship highlights public health domains and associated strategies that can be the impetus for collaboration between and among the levels in the social ecological model and are integral to improving survivor outcomes. This paper describes the Public Health Action Model for Cancer Survivorship, an integrative framework that combines the National Action Plan for Cancer Survivorship with the social ecological model to demonstrate how interaction among the various levels may promote better outcomes for survivors.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S470-S476. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.09.001
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Men with prostate cancer face difficult choices when selecting a therapy for localized prostate cancer. Comparative data from controlled studies are lacking and clinical opinions diverge about the benefits and harms of treatment options. Consequently, there is limited guidance for patients regarding the impact of treatment decisions on quality of life. There are opportunities for public health to intervene at several decision-making points. Information on typical quality of life outcomes associated with specific prostate cancer treatments could help patients select treatment options. From 2003 to present, the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control at CDC has supported projects to explore patient information-seeking behavior post-diagnosis, caregiver and provider involvement in treatment decision making, and patient quality of life following prostate cancer treatment. CDC’s work also includes research that explores barriers and facilitators to the presentation of active surveillance as a viable treatment option and promotes equal access to information for men and their caregivers. This article provides an overview of the literature and considerations that initiated establishing a prospective public health research agenda around treatment decision making. Insights gathered from CDC-supported studies are poised to enhance understanding of the process of shared decision making and the influence of patient, caregiver, and provider preferences on the selection of treatment choices. These findings provide guidance about attributes that maximize patient experiences in survivorship, including optimal quality of life and patient and caregiver satisfaction with information, treatment decisions, and subsequent care.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S483-S488. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.016
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer survivors, the medical community, public health professionals, researchers, and policymakers all need information about newly diagnosed cancer cases and deaths to better understand and address the disease burden. CDC collects cancer data on 96% of the U.S. population through the National Program of Cancer Registries. The National Program of Cancer Registries routinely collects data on all cancer occurrences, deaths, and the types of initial treatment received by the patients, and recently CDC has made advances in its cancer surveillance activities that have direct applicability to cancer survivorship research and care. This article examines CDC’s innovative uses of the National Program of Cancer Registries infrastructure and data as a recruitment source for survivorship research studies and behavioral interventions; comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research; and the collection, consolidation, and dissemination of treatment summaries for cancer survivors and their providers. This paper also discusses long-term, idealistic plans for additional data linkages and sharing among public health, providers, and the cancer survivor through innovative concepts such as patient portals and rapid-learning health care.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S528-S535. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.026
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: There is increasing concern regarding the financial burden of cancer on patients and their families. This study presents nationally representative estimates of annual out-of-pocket (OOP) burden among non-elderly cancer survivors and assesses the association between high OOP burden and access to care and preventive service utilization. Methods: Using the 2008-2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 4,271 cancer survivors and 96,780 individuals without a history of cancer were identified, all aged 18-64 years. High annual OOP burden was defined as spending >20% of annual family income on OOP healthcare costs. Associations between high OOP burden and access to care were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were conducted in 2015. Results: Compared with individuals without a cancer history, cancer survivors were more likely to report a high OOP burden (4.3% vs 3.4%, p=0.009) in adjusted analyses. High OOP burden was more common among cancer survivors who were poor (18.4%), with either public insurance (7.9%) or uninsured (5.7%), and not working (10.2%). Among cancer survivors, high OOP burden was associated with being unable to obtain necessary medical care (19.2% vs 12.5%, p=0.002), delaying necessary medical care (21.6% vs 13.8%, p=0.002), and lower breast cancer screening rates among age-appropriate women (63.2% vs 75.9%, p=0.02). Conclusions: High OOP burden is more common among adults with a cancer history than those without a cancer history. High OOP burden was associated with being unable to obtain necessary medical care, delaying necessary medical care, and lower breast cancer screening rates among women.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S489-S497. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.09.002

  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S467-S469. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.006
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Chemotherapy for breast cancer has been associated with cognitive problems; however, the impact of adjuvant hormone therapy is less clear. No studies have explored provider discussions about cognitive concerns or factors associated with neurocognitive treatment. This study examined cognitive problems, factors associated with having a provider discussion, and receipt of neurocognitive treatment. Methods: Female breast cancer survivors (N=2,537) from the Sister Study and the Two Sister Study who were at least 1 year post-treatment were surveyed in 2012 about their cancer therapies (confirmed by medical records); cognitive concerns; related provider discussions; and neurocognitive treatment. A total of 2,296 women were included in the current 2014 analysis. Extensive covariate information was also ascertained for predictive multivariate models. Results: The prevalence of self-reported cognitive problems after treatment was 60%. Of those reporting cognitive problems, only 37% had discussed those concerns with a provider and 15% had been treated for cognitive symptoms. The odds of reported cognitive concerns that started during and after treatment were elevated for those who received only hormone therapy and no chemotherapy (OR=1.64, 95% CI=1.15, 2.33); chemotherapy and no hormone therapy (OR=5.63, 95% CI=3.52, 9.00); or both (OR=6.33, 95% CI=4.21, 9.54) compared with those reporting neither treatment. Conclusions: The high prevalence of cognitive concerns underscores the importance of monitoring breast cancer survivors for potential neurocognitive effects of hormone and chemotherapy, discussions with survivors about those concerns, and treatment referrals. Monitoring changes over time can help to evaluate both psychosocial and neurocognitive care provided for survivors.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S498-S508. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Among women aged <45 years, African Americans have the highest breast cancer incidence rates of any ethnic/racial group and disproportionately higher rates of mortality. Young breast cancer survivors (YBCSs) may require psychosocial and reproductive health support when navigating diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up care. To address these needs, the Young Sisters Initiative: A Guide to a Better You! Program (YSI) was developed, implemented, and evaluated. The purpose of this study was to assess implementation and fidelity; identify barriers and facilitators to implementation; and explore audience access, use, and perceived value of the YSI. Methods: A mixed-method, process evaluation of the YSI using interviews, an online screener, and post-use survey was conducted with data collected and analyzed from February through August 2013. Thematic analysis of qualitative data was conducted without qualitative data analysis software. Survey data were analyzed using PASW Statistics, version 18. Results: YSI core elements were implemented as intended. A total of 1,442 people visited the YSI website; 93% of breast cancer survivors who visited the site (and consented to be in the study) were African American; 75% of post-use survey YBCS respondents were very or somewhat satisfied with the YSI; and 70% of YBCS respondents said the YSI content was somewhat or very useful. Conclusions: Findings suggest the value of using the Internet, including social media, to provide African-American YBCSs who are newly diagnosed, in treatment, and post-treatment with reproductive and psychosocial information and support. Further implementation and evaluation of programs addressing the needs of YBCSs are needed.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S543-S549. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.09.003

  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12/2015; 49(6):S477-S482. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.008
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The University of Michigan School of Public Health Preventive Medicine Residency (UMSPH PMR) Integrative Medicine Program (IMP) was developed to incorporate integrative medicine (IM), public health, and preventive medicine principles into a comprehensive curriculum for preventive medicine residents and faculty. The objectives of this project were to (1) increase the preventive medicine workforce skill sets based in complementary and alternative medicine and IM that would address individual and population health issues; (2) address the increasing demand for evidence-based IM by training physicians to implement cost-effective primary and secondary prevention services and programs; and (3) share lessons learned, curriculum evaluations, and best practices with the larger cohort of funded IM PMR programs. The UMSPH PMR collaborated with University of Michigan IM faculty to incorporate existing IM competencies with those already established for preventive medicine and public health residency training as the first critical step for IMP curriculum integration. Essential teaching strategies incorporated didactic and practicum methods, and made use of seasoned IM faculty, along with newly minted preventive medicine integrative teaching faculty, and PMR resident learners as IM teachers. The major components of the IMP curriculum included resident participation in IMP Orientation Sessions, resident leadership in epidemiology graduate IM seminars, resident rotations in IM month-long clinical practicums, resident participation in interprofessional health system-wide IM clinical case conferences, and PMR faculty enrollment in the renowned Faculty Scholars Program in Integrative Healthcare. This paper describes the novel interdisciplinary collaborations and key curriculum components that resulted in the IMP, as well as evaluation of strengths, weaknesses, and lessons learned.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 11/2015; 49(5):S270-S277. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.07.009
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Comprehensive cultural competency includes knowledge and awareness of culturally based healing and wellness practices. Healthcare providers should be aware of the individual patient's beliefs, culture, and use of culturally based health practices because patients may adopt such practices for general wellness or as adjunct therapies without the benefit of discussion with their healthcare provider. This article describes the culturally based traditional healing curriculum that has been implemented in the University of New Mexico Public Health and General Preventive Medicine Residency Program in order to fulfill this knowledge necessity. Curricular elements were added in a stepwise manner starting in 2011, with the full content as described implemented starting in 2013. Data were collected annually with evaluation of the full curriculum occurring in 2015. New Mexico has a diverse population base that includes predominantly Hispanic and Native American cultures, making the inclusion of curriculum regarding traditional healing practices very pertinent. Residents at the University of New Mexico were educated through several curricular components about topics such as Curanderismo, the art of Mexican Folk Healing. An innovative approach was used, with a compendium of training methods that included learning directly from traditional healers and participation in healing practices. The incorporation of this residency curriculum resulted in a means to produce physicians well trained in approaching patient care and population health with knowledge of culturally based health practices in order to facilitate healthy patients and communities.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 11/2015; 49(5):S263-S269. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.07.007
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: During 2012, the USDHHS's Health Resources and Services Administration funded 12 accredited preventive medicine residencies to incorporate an evidence-based integrative medicine curriculum into their training programs. It also funded a national coordinating center at the American College of Preventive Medicine, known as the Integrative Medicine in Preventive Medicine Education (IMPriME) Center, to provide technical assistance to the 12 grantees. To help with this task, the IMPriME Center established a multidisciplinary steering committee, versed in integrative medicine, whose primary aim was to develop integrative medicine core competencies for incorporation into preventive medicine graduate medical education training. The competency development process was informed by central integrative medicine definitions and principles, preventive medicine's dual role in clinical and population-based prevention, and the burgeoning evidence base of integrative medicine. The steering committee considered an interdisciplinary integrative medicine contextual framework guided by several themes related to workforce development and population health. A list of nine competencies, mapped to the six general domains of competence approved by the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, was operationalized through an iterative exercise with the 12 grantees in a process that included mapping each site's competency and curriculum products to the core competencies. The competencies, along with central curricular components informed by grantees' work presented elsewhere in this supplement, are outlined as a roadmap for residency programs aiming to incorporate integrative medicine content into their curricula. This set of competencies adds to the larger efforts of the IMPriME initiative to facilitate and enhance further curriculum development and implementation by not only the current grantees but other stakeholders in graduate medical education around integrative medicine training.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 11/2015; 49(5):S222-S229. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.019
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Physicians are increasingly approached by individuals seeking integrative approaches to health care and well-being. Many integrative modalities include a physical activity component. Patients seek guidance from primary and specialty care providers on the safe and effective incorporation of these modalities into their lifestyle. Physicians and other health professionals receive very limited training in the clinical applications of exercise science. This paper reports on a curriculum designed to teach health professionals key exercise constructs for application to clinical practice for prevention and management of lifestyle-related disease, and incorporating the curriculum into a preventive medicine residency training program. The course was developed in 2012–2013, data collected in 2013–2015, and analysis was done in 2015. Six modules were developed as part of a 24-hour course. Each module included didactic, laboratory, and case examples. The modules included energetics, exercise and cardiorespiratory health, bone health, obesity and sarcopenia, balance and fall prevention, and behavior change and the use of technologies. The delivery was found feasible for all three components, delivered in 2–4-hour segments. The incorporation into the residency curriculum was feasible, efficacious, well received, and easily incorporated into the existing curriculum. This comprehensive curriculum has the potential to close the gap in medical school, residency, graduate, nursing, and integrative curricula on this important topic. Current practitioners would benefit in primary care and geriatric settings. This curriculum would also be useful for cross-disciplinary researchers, including public health, health behaviors, and integrative medicine practitioners.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 11/2015; 49(5):S278-S284. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.018
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Integrative medicine (IM) is by its very definition patient centric: "It reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches." Best methods for teaching IM in residency have not been well described. Methods An IM curriculum for preventive medicine (PM) residents was thoughtfully developed and iteratively revised using Kern's six-step approach. The centerpiece of this curriculum was to have learners work collaboratively within teams on projects that would facilitate IM-focused care within primary care practices. Before embarking on specific IM-related projects, residents immersed themselves within the practices to understand the needs of the community. Results Forty-eight PM residents have participated in the curriculum in the last 3 years, and 27 unique physician preceptors served as mentors for the projects. Both residents and preceptors enjoyed working on the projects, and both groups considered the work to be a valuable educational pursuit. Common IM content areas covered by the projects dealt with interprofessional collaboration, health promotion, and population-based prevention. Although there were challenges associated with implementation of the projects, overcoming these enhanced the PM residents' confidence and ability to serve as agents of change. Conclusions An IM curriculum was successfully incorporated into a PM residency program. The focus on serving the community, or a population health approach, may not be the most common approach in IM, but it worked effectively to enhance the IM knowledge and skills of PM residents.
    American Journal of Preventive Medicine 11/2015; 49(5):S285-S289. DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.001