CMEpalooza Spring is a 1-day event scheduled for Wednesday, April 17 that will feature a series of sessions selected from a pool of submitted abstracts. Broadcasts will stream live on the LIVE page of this website and be available for viewing shortly after their conclusion on the Archive page. There is no charge to view or participate in any of these sessions.
9 AM ET
Can You Define and Articulate the Value of Your Education?
Dwindling budgets, inconsistent results, lack of organizational support for IME, lack of standardized reporting, lack of consistent operational definitions for learners, and many, many more… these represent a few of the many reasons why deciding which grant to support is becoming ever more critical for our IME stakeholders. A “failed” educational program is not a luxury most supporters can afford. Through interactive panel discussions, members of the MEC and IME communities will discuss best practices and will take viewer questions and hear examples on the following topics:
- Can we define value as a return on educational investment? (NOT ROI)
- Beyond pre/post, how can providers better define educational outcomes in terms of the value of the education to the patient, the clinician learners, the provider, and the supporter?
- How can IME build a better story that demonstrates the value of educational investments by extracting outcomes data from a myriad of reporting styles?
- Building a better grant – how can providers help IME committees see the potential value of the education through the grant request?
- For IME, what elements should committees look for in a grant request that reduce risk, and which are red flags?
- How can supporters share return on educational investment with their respective internal teams (medical affairs, commercial, etc.)?
- When is the appropriate time to report outcomes?
LB Wong, Director, Lilly Grant Office
William Mencia, MD, FACEHP, CHCP, Vice President, Education and Medical Affairs, Med-IQ
Wendy Cerenzia, CEO, CE Outcomes
Matthew Frese, President, Med Learning Group
Dale Kummerle, Director, Global IME, Bristol Myers Squibb
10 AM ET
Outcomes Standardization Project: One Year Later
There were two driving forces that lead to a groundswell of momentum and support coming out of the 2018 AIS meeting. First, in conversations building off the morning’s keynote and in the midst of Greg Salinas’ session entitled, “Standardization of Outcomes: Lessons Learned from Attempts to Aggregate” – we hatched the idea of an outcomes standardization project (OSP). While these conversations were energizing, shortly thereafter the Regeneron team (including Karyn Ruiz-Cordell) presented a session entitled, the “The Tower of Babel: Enough Already, Can We Please Speak the Same Language?” and the groundswell rapidly grew. In the weeks that followed a plan of action was devised by an initial Outcomes Standardization Project (OSP) Steering Team that relies fully on volunteer energies, galvanized around a passion to solve the following (draft) problem statement: “The community struggles to effectively understand and communicate the value of CE in part BECAUSE the community lacks a standardized outcomes language and a set of standardized approaches to measuring impact…as a result, effectively comparing and aggregating outcomes data and insights remains impossible.” We believe that this problem statement can be read through three lenses: 1) the professionals who design and build educational interventions for healthcare providers (HCPs) need this standardization to effectively measure the impact of their efforts; 2) research scientists need this standardization to effectively advance our branch of educational research; and 3) professionals who provide commercial support need this standardization to effectively understand the impact of their grant funding and to advocate for larger grant-making budgets.
While the initial 2018 standardization efforts do not solve every problem that the community faces, it has created a strong foundation upon which on-going work can build. More so, it is not the intention of the OSP Steering team to suggest that all outcomes efforts and reporting mandates the inclusion of each of the standardized item, rather we propose that if these specific terms are used, that these standardized definitions be universally applied.
General Plan of Action:
The plan of action that the OSP steering team has been working through over the past seven months and the plans for moving forward into 2019 and beyond have been recently detailed in an Almanac Article, 2018 CE Outcomes Standardization Project (OSP): Just the Beginning and in a CMEpalooza session, Trust the Process (and the Terms We Use to Describe It): A Standardized Outcomes Taxonomy. This session will provide a community an update on the project one year after its beginning.
Brian S. McGowan, PhD, FACEhp, Chief Learning Officer & Co-Founder, ArcheMedX, Inc.
Sue McGuinness, PhD, CCMEP, Senior Medical Education Grants Manager, AstraZeneca
Wendy Turell, DrPH, FACEHP, Vice President, CME Outcomes and Analytics, PlatformQ Health
11 AM ET
SPECIAL 5-YEAR ANNIVERSARY SESSION
The MECC Reborn: Our Present and Future
In 2014, a CMEpalooza Fall session examined the viability of the medical education company (MECC) as some organizations struggled to survive (you can watch Death of the MECC: Fact or Fiction? here). Not anymore. MECCs are generally thriving as a whole, but are now faced with a new set of challenges regarding industry consolidation, large corporate and private equity overlords, and increasing concerns about federal regulations. This session will look at how, since our Year 1 broadcast, things have changed for MECCs (or not), how viewpoints have shifted (or not), and how we have all aged so gracefully (yeah right).
Audrie Tornow, CHCP, Vice President, Educational Strategy & Partnerships, Paradigm Medical Communications
Pete Sheldon, BA, Vice President, Education and Patient Engagement, Med-IQ
Daniel Guinee, MBA, CHCP, Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer, ASiM CE
1 p.m. ET
Lighten the Load! Designing Efficient, Engaging Education Based on Cognitive Principles
We are all faced with a tsunami of new information and decisions to make each and every day. The human brain can only process a finite amount at one time. It makes sense to sort incoming information by creating mental representations. Whether you are designing a live program or an online course, it can be helpful to consider how 3 cognitive processes (selection, organization, and integration) relate to truly effective learning.
Richard Mayer’s 12 Principles of Multimedia Learning, based on cognitive science, provides guidance on how to develop educational materials in a way that supports the brain’s processing capabilities. The central tenets are:
- There are 2 main channels for processing information: auditory and visual
- Each channel has a limited capacity
- Learning is an active process of selecting, organizing, and integrating information based upon prior knowledge.
Education based on Mayer’s theory reduces the load on processing channels by telling a story with coherent auditory and visual information. Whether applied to a simple PowerPoint presentation, a live meeting, or a more complex online activity, education based on these principles will have greater impact.
In this session we will review the 12 Principles of Multimedia Learning from Mayer’s 2009 textbook and provide examples of how each may be applied to the development of your educational materials.
2 PM ET
You Can Do It! Busting Myths About the Use of Audience Response Technology
Background: Imagine this… Continuing Education (CE) Director, Samantha Barnes, has identified a new goal for her CE program: focus on increasing audience engagement and improving learning outcomes. To aide in meeting this goal, Samantha tells CE Coordinator, Alexa Smith, that at least 10% of the learning activities she develops must incorporate the use of an audience response system (ARS). Alexa retreats to her office, stricken with anxiety regarding the new goal. A million thoughts run through her mind at once.
“What exactly is an audience response system?”
“How do I get speakers to use this technology?”
“How can I ensure that I receive their presentation slides in time to format the polling questions?”
“I am already very busy. How can I find the extra time that this will require?”
“What if the system fails during the presentation?”
“What if the speaker or participants have trouble with the system?”
“I don’t have time to babysit each presentation during a large conference.”
“What do I do for breakout sessions? There is only one of me!”
We believe that many of us can relate to these feelings. However, utilizing ARS in your CE program does not need to be intimidating!
This Session: We will explore opportunities to integrate ARS as a tool to 1) improve audience engagement and learning outcomes, 2) reduce post-activity follow-up and gather more effective and accurate feedback, 3) increase options for measuring participant change, and 4) demonstrate compliance with ACCME Accreditation with Commendation criteria 35 and 36. Several barriers to utilization of ARS and methods to overcome them will also be discussed. Participants will walk away with a list of new ideas for incorporating ARS into their own CE program. Additionally, we will provide a template for a handout that can be given to speakers that provides easy instructions for incorporating ARS into their presentations.
Christina Billings, MPH, Coordinator, Continuing Medical Education, Des Moines University
Vanessa Gray, MHA, CMP, CHCP, Director, Continuing Medical Education, Des Moines University
3 PM ET
Nobody Puts Outcomes in the Corner
It’s been more than 10 years since Don Moore’s pivotal article on outcomes levels was released, revolutionizing the CME industry’s thinking and approach to outcomes. But has Moore put us in a corner? Rather than being creative with our approach to measuring outcomes, we are stuck in a pyramid of levels that pushes us to try to collect and analyze data that might not be ideal for all educational interventions. This session will include representatives from pharma, medical education companies, and academia as they discuss the hot topic of Level 5 outcomes and if and where it fits into education.
The session will begin with a focus on aligning the outcomes measure to meet the identified gaps and goals of the program along with the preferences of the commercial supporter, as well as share barriers and problems with standard performance-level outcomes. The second half of the session will focus on the importance of reporting to stakeholder and what elements of outcomes (Moore’s, TELMS, others) are of most value to whom. Members of the panel will use case studies and experience to describe creative solutions to assessing performance change.
Greg Salinas, President, CE Outcomes
Mary Faulkner, Associate Director, Global Grants and Charitable Donations, AbbVie
Shunda Irons Brown, PhD, MBA, CHCP, Senior Manager, Medical Education & Grants, Novo Nordisk
Marlene Heeg, Managing Director, Continuing Education and Professional Development, Purdue University College of Pharmacy
Karyn Ruiz-Cordell, Associate Director, Medical Education and Data Analytics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
4 PM ET
CME Overview for the CME Professional
Rarely has anyone ever set out to become a CME Professional. Most of us find our way to the opportunity by chance. Each year, new members enter into the world of the CME profession. The amount of information necessary to understand the scope, the vernacular, and the many rules, can be daunting, for both the novice and the seasoned veteran. This presentation will describe high level concepts, definitions, and explanations related to program planning and implementation of CME activities. Additional resources for exploration will also be provided.