ArticleBMC medical education2022
Virtual conference participant's perceptions of its effectiveness and future projections.
Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Catalysing global surgery: a meta-research study on factors affecting surgical research collaborations with Africa.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Nephrology Health Professionals' Perspectives on Their Preferred Modality for Scientific Meetings, Balancing Affordability, Sustainability and Opportunities to Interact With Peers: An International Society of Nephrology Survey.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Virtual Learning in Emergency Medicine Residency Programs.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
- Examining gender trends of conference speakers at major dermatology conferences, 2018-2023.International journal of women's dermatology · 2024Article
- Eliciting Insights From Chat Logs of the 25X5 Symposium to Reduce Documentation Burden: Novel Application of Topic Modeling.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Impact of virtual continued medical education on carbon footprint and awareness of digital sobriety: A retrospective cross-sectional study among public health professionals in India.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Integration of virtual platforms for enhanced conference experience: Data-based evidence from the Society of Interdisciplinary Placebo Studies 2021 conference.Frontiers in communication · 2022Article
- Residents and Fellows of US Medical Residencies and Fellowships Strongly Prefer In-Person to Virtual Conference Format: A Cross-sectional Survey.JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe virtual conference format has become an essential tool for professional development of researchers around the world since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to identify empirical evidence of the benefits and challenges of virtual conferences by investigating participants' experiences with them.
methodsThe study participants were delegates to the 40th annual meeting of the Korean Society of Nephrology, which was held virtually in September, 2020. A questionnaire was developed and implemented among the conference attendees. The 44-item questionnaire included five sub-scales related to participant perceptions of the virtual conference, which were (a) convenience and accessibility, (b) planning and organization, (c) technology use, (d) social exchanges, and (e) overall satisfaction, their preferences of conference formats, and their views of future projections for a virtual conference.
resultsA total of 279 delegates completed and returned the questionnaires (18.8% response rate). Participants varied in gender, age, profession, work location, and prior experience with conferences. On a four-point Likert scale (1 = "strongly disagree" and 4 = "strongly agree"), participants showed positive perceptions of the virtual conference in general, where the total mean (M) was 3.03 and less positive perceptions on social exchanges (M = 2.72). Participant perceptions of the virtual conference differed across age groups, professions, and prior experience with conferences (p < .05). Approximately half of the participants (n = 139) preferred the virtual format, and 33% (n = 92) preferred the conventional format. Participant preferences for the virtual format were somewhat evenly distributed between asynchronous (32.9%) and synchronous (29.1%) modes. Participants predicted a virtual conference would continue to be a popular delivery format after the end of the COVID-19.
conclusionsAlthough participants had positive perceptions of the virtual conference, more support needs to be offered to those who may be less comfortable with using technology or with online interactions, and there is a need for improvement in supporting social exchange among attendees. Also, it is suggested that a blend of asynchronous and synchronous delivery methods should be considered to meet the varied needs of attendees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.