Voices of conference attendees: how should future hybrid conferences be designed?

Sai Sreenidhi Ram; Daniel Stricker; Carine Pannetier; Nathalie Tabin; Richard W Costello; Daiana Stolz; Kevin W Eva; Sören Huwendiek

doi:10.1186/s12909-024-05351-z

Voices of conference attendees: how should future hybrid conferences be designed?

BMC Med Educ. 2024 Apr 9;24(1):393. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05351-z.

Authors

Sai Sreenidhi Ram^{1

2}, Daniel Stricker³, Carine Pannetier⁴, Nathalie Tabin⁴, Richard W Costello⁵, Daiana Stolz^{6

7}, Kevin W Eva⁸, Sören Huwendiek³

Affiliations

¹ Institute for Medical Education, Department for Assessment and Evaluation, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland. sai.s.ram@outlook.com.
² Graduate School for Health Sciences (GHS), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. sai.s.ram@outlook.com.
³ Institute for Medical Education, Department for Assessment and Evaluation, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
⁴ European Respiratory Society, Lausanne, Switzerland.
⁵ Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland.
⁶ The Clinics of Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonary Cell Research, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
⁷ Clinic of Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
⁸ Centre for Health Education Scholarship, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Abstract

Background: With conference attendees having expressed preference for hybrid meeting formats (containing both in-person and virtual components), organisers are challenged to find the best combination of events for academic meetings. Better understanding what attendees prioritise in a hybrid conference should allow better planning and need fulfilment.

Methods: An online survey with closed and open-ended questions was distributed to registrants of an international virtual conference. Responses were then submitted to descriptive statistical analysis and directed content analysis.

Results: 823 surveys (Response Rate = 4.9%) were received. Of the 813 who expressed a preference, 56.9% (N = 463) desired hybrid conference formats in the future, 32.0% (N = 260) preferred in-person conferences and 11.1% (N = 90) preferred virtual conferences. Presuming a hybrid meeting could be adopted, 67.4% (461/684) preferred that virtual sessions take place both during the in-person conference and be spread throughout the year. To optimise in-person components of hybrid conferences, recommendations received from 503 respondents included: prioritising clinical skills sessions (26.2%, N = 132), live international expert presentations and discussions (15.7%, N = 79) and interaction between delegates (13.5%, N = 68). To optimise virtual components, recommendations received from 486 respondents included: prioritising a live streaming platform with international experts' presentations and discussions (24.3%, N = 118), clinical case discussions (19.8%, N = 96) and clinical update sessions (10.1%, N = 49).

Conclusions: Attendees envision hybrid conferences in which organisers can enable the vital interaction between individuals during an in-person component (e.g., networking, viewing and improving clinical skills) while accessing virtual content at their convenience (e.g., online expert presentations with latest advancements, clinical case discussions and debates). Having accessible virtual sessions throughout the year, as well as live streaming during the in-person component of hybrid conferences, allows for opportunity to prolong learning beyond the conference days.

Keywords: Hybrid conference; In-person conference; Virtual conference.

MeSH terms

Clinical Competence*
Humans
Learning*
Research Design