Skip survey header

2021 Spring Symposium Evaluation, Outcome Measurement & Attestation

Program Evaluation

Please evaluate each session/faculty member. Evaluations are the most effective way for the course director and Planning Committee to determine whether or not your learning needs were met. It also provides insight as to whether activity alterations may be necessary.


Please evaluate 2021 Spring Symposium on the following items:
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall, the Symposium was:
Overall, the educational content was:
The Session Hosts were:
The Statewide Research Showcase was:
The Resident Speaker Forum was
Henry Pitzele, MD, FACEP
ICEP Update
 
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall quality of topic and speaker:
The presenter’s teaching skills were:
Gillian Schmitz, MD, FACEP 
The Current State and Future of Emergency Medicine:  What Every Physician Should Know
 
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall quality of topic and speaker:
The presenter’s teaching skills were:
Aditi U. Joshi, MD, MSc, FACEP
Telehealth and Emergency Medicine:  Present and Future Utility
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall quality of topic and speaker:
The presenter’s teaching skills were:
Maame Yaa “Maya” A. B. Yiadom, MD, MPH, MSCI
What Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning Can Do for Your ED 
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall quality of topic and speaker:
The presenter’s teaching skills were:
Meeta Shah, MD
You Are Out of Reach – Tricks to Treat Patients Out of the ED
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall quality of topic and speaker:
The presenter’s teaching skills were:
PRODUCT SHOWCASE
Ben Usatch, MD
Assessing Disability in Acute Ischemic Stroke:  Beyond Just the NIHSS
Space Cell ExcellentGoodAverageFairPoorNo opinion
Overall quality of topic and speaker:
The presenter’s teaching skills were:
Disclosure of whether or not each individual in control of content had conflicts of interest with ACCME defined commercial interests was provided in advance of my participation in the accredited education. *This question is required.
Disclosure of whether or not there was commercial support received from ACCME defined commercial interests was provided in advance of my participation in the accredited education. *This question is required.
The learning objectives were actionable and measurable and supported by the activity content. *This question is required.
The activity format was appropriate for the setting and relevant to my practice. *This question is required.
The activity content was fair balanced, free of bias, and used generic names for drugs or equipment or reflected trade names from several companies. *This question is required.
Patient treatment recommendations were evidence-based, appropriate for audience, and will contribute to overall improvements in care. *This question is required.
Scientific studies cited within the activity conform to standards acceptable by the scientific community. *This question is required.
Are there any issues you would like to raise regarding the activity content? *This question is required.
Will you make changes in your practice because of your participation in the activity? *This question is required.