Cardiology for the Practitioner - April 30, 2022 Speaker Evaluation Question Title * 1. Please provide FIRST and LAST Name: Question Title * 2. Please provide your Email Address: Question Title * 3. Medical Specialty* (Please select one. If other, please specify): Primary Care Physician Cardiologist Internal Medicine Specialist Nurse / Nurse Practitioner Technologist Other Specialist Physician, (please specify):Other Health Care Professional, (please specify) Question Title * 4. Type of Practice: Full-time Part-time Solo Group Question Title * 5. Practice Location: Office Hospital Both SESSION I: Chair: Akshay Bagai, MD Question Title * 6. Speaker: Beth Abramson, MDTopic: Thresholds instead of targets in lipid lowering and prevention in ASCVD 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 7. Speaker: Anatoly Langer, MDTopic: Evidence based choices in lipid lowering beyond statin 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 8. Speaker: Shaun Goodman, MDTopic: Beyond LDL-C lowering: anti-inflammatory therapies for CAD 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 9. Speaker: Kim Connelly, MDTopic: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and ASCVD: SGLT2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, or both? 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 10. Speaker: FacultyTopic: Panel Discussion with audience, moderated session, Q&A augmented by use of on-line chat, Q&A or raising of hand 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree SESSION II: Chairs: Kaja Konieczny, MD Question Title * 11. Speaker: Paul Dorian, MDTopic: Which AF requires treatment and which treatment? 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 12. Speaker: Andrew Yan, MDTopic: What is the role for aspirin in CVD prevention? 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 13. Speaker: Charles de Mestral, MDTopic: Peripheral artery disease: Underappreciated and undertreated 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 14. Speaker: Yin Ge, MD Topic: Diagnosis and management of patients with chest pain 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 15. Speaker: FacultyTopic: Panel Discussion with audience, moderated session, Q&A augmented by use of on-line chat, Q&A or raising of hand 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree SESSION III: Chairs: Geraldine Ong, MD Question Title * 16. Speaker: Chi-Ming Chow, MDTopic: What is the new standard of care in hypertension? 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 17. Speaker: Susanna Mak, MDTopic: Evidence-based HFrEF management: I need two hands to count 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 18. Speaker: Gordon Moe, MDTopic: Evidence-based management of HFpEF: are my hands free? 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 19. Speaker: FacultyTopic: Panel Discussion with audience, moderated session, Q&A augmented by use of on-line chat, Q&A or raising of hand 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 1 = Strongly Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 2 = Disagree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 3 = Neutral Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 4 = Agree Speaker / Presentation was Balanced & Unbiased 5 = Strongly Agree Was consistent with stated objectives Was consistent with stated objectives 1 = Strongly Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 2 = Disagree Was consistent with stated objectives 3 = Neutral Was consistent with stated objectives 4 = Agree Was consistent with stated objectives 5 = Strongly Agree Information was presented clearly Information was presented clearly 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was presented clearly 2 = Disagree Information was presented clearly 3 = Neutral Information was presented clearly 4 = Agree Information was presented clearly 5 = Strongly Agree Information was relevant to practice Information was relevant to practice 1 = Strongly Disagree Information was relevant to practice 2 = Disagree Information was relevant to practice 3 = Neutral Information was relevant to practice 4 = Agree Information was relevant to practice 5 = Strongly Agree Discussion time was adequate Discussion time was adequate 1 = Strongly Disagree Discussion time was adequate 2 = Disagree Discussion time was adequate 3 = Neutral Discussion time was adequate 4 = Agree Discussion time was adequate 5 = Strongly Agree Question Title * 20. Comments: Next