4.7 Article

A web-based survey of educational opportunities of medical professionals based on changes in conference design during the COVID-19 pandemic

Journal

EDUCATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
Volume 27, Issue 7, Pages 10371-10386

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10639-022-11032-5

Keywords

Distance education; Online learning; Adult learning; Lifelong learning

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study assessed the impact of COVID-19 on academic conferences through a web-based questionnaire survey of Japanese medical professionals. The results showed that while some participants preferred web conferences or a mix of web and on-site conferences, the number of presentations pertaining to novel findings decreased in web conferences compared to face-to-face conferences, and some participants recorded or filmed the sessions despite prohibition.
Owing to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, understanding how to hold future online academic conferences effectively is imperative. We assessed the impact of COVID-19 on academic conferences, including facilities and settings for attendance, participation status, cost burden, and preferences for future styles of holding conferences, through a web-based questionnaire survey of 2,739 Japanese medical professionals, from December 2020 to February 2021. Of the participants, 28% preferred web conferences, 60% preferred a mix of web and on-site conferences, and 12% preferred on-site conferences. Additionally, 27% of the presenters stopped presenting new findings at web conferences. The proportion of participants who audio-recorded or filmed the sessions, despite prohibition, was six times higher at web than face-to-face conferences. Since the COVID-19 outbreak, the percentage of participants attending general presentations decreased from 91 to 51%. While web conferencing offers advantages, these are offset by a decrease in presentations pertaining to novel findings and data.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available