A. Webb Roberts Center for Continuing Medical XII SWAN 2018 Day 2 Thursday, September 20, 2018 Question Title * 1. Title MD DO Resident DPM PA Nurse Practitioner Other Other (please specify) Question Title * 2. Was the content free of bias? Yes No If you selected No, please indicate bias perceived during this presentation. Today's activity included a dinner session.Please ONLY EVALUATE THE SESSION WHICH YOU PARTICIPATED IN. Respiratory Workshop Question Title * 3. Faculty Evaluation:Non-invasive Ventilation (HCFNC/CPAP) - Dr. Ramanathan 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of content Quality of content 1 = Poor Quality of content 2 Quality of content 3 Quality of content 4 Quality of content 5 = Excellent Expertise of the Faculty Expertise of the Faculty 1 = Poor Expertise of the Faculty 2 Expertise of the Faculty 3 Expertise of the Faculty 4 Expertise of the Faculty 5 = Excellent Clarity and Organization Clarity and Organization 1 = Poor Clarity and Organization 2 Clarity and Organization 3 Clarity and Organization 4 Clarity and Organization 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 4. Faculty Evaluation:Neurally Adjusted Ventilation Assist (NAVA) - Dr. Stein 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of content Quality of content 1 = Poor Quality of content 2 Quality of content 3 Quality of content 4 Quality of content 5 = Excellent Expertise of the Faculty Expertise of the Faculty 1 = Poor Expertise of the Faculty 2 Expertise of the Faculty 3 Expertise of the Faculty 4 Expertise of the Faculty 5 = Excellent Clarity and Organization Clarity and Organization 1 = Poor Clarity and Organization 2 Clarity and Organization 3 Clarity and Organization 4 Clarity and Organization 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 5. Faculty Evaluation:European Concensus Guidelines for Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) and Surfactant Therapy - Dr. Sweet 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of content Quality of content 1 = Poor Quality of content 2 Quality of content 3 Quality of content 4 Quality of content 5 = Excellent Expertise of the Faculty Expertise of the Faculty 1 = Poor Expertise of the Faculty 2 Expertise of the Faculty 3 Expertise of the Faculty 4 Expertise of the Faculty 5 = Excellent Clarity and Organization Clarity and Organization 1 = Poor Clarity and Organization 2 Clarity and Organization 3 Clarity and Organization 4 Clarity and Organization 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 6. Faculty Evaluation:Ventilator Strategies for Severe - BPD - Dr. Yoder 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of content Quality of content 1 = Poor Quality of content 2 Quality of content 3 Quality of content 4 Quality of content 5 = Excellent Expertise of the Faculty Expertise of the Faculty 1 = Poor Expertise of the Faculty 2 Expertise of the Faculty 3 Expertise of the Faculty 4 Expertise of the Faculty 5 = Excellent Clarity and Organization Clarity and Organization 1 = Poor Clarity and Organization 2 Clarity and Organization 3 Clarity and Organization 4 Clarity and Organization 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 7. Faculty Evaluation:International Symposium Discussion BPD/CLD prevention 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 8. Faculty Evaluation:Patent Ductus Arteriosus (PDA) to treat or not to treat - Dr. Shah 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 9. Faculty Evaluation:Non-Invasive Ventilation (BiPAP/Duo PAP/NIMV) - Dr. Ramanathan 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 10. Faculty Evaluation:Infections in the NICU, What is New - Dr. Pablo Sanchez 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 11. Faculty Evaluation:Infections in the NICU, What is New - Dr. Pablo Sanchez 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 12. Faculty Evaluation:Culture of culture negative sepsis & antiobiotic stewardship - Dr. Cantey 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 13. Faculty Evaluation:Respiratory panel 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Nutrition & Feeding Workshop Question Title * 14. Faculty Evaluation:When Milk is Not Milk: Distinguishing Between Mother's & Donor Milk & Other Human Milk - Dr. Hamilton Spence 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 15. Faculty Evaluation:Pathophysiology of Dysphagia & Dysmotility in the NICU Infant: Role of Brian-Gut reflex integration - Dr. Jadcherla 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 16. Faculty Evaluation:Feeding & Medications Strategies to Prevent TPN-Associated Cholestasis - Dr. Premkumar 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 17. Faculty Evaluation:Feeding Conundrums: Preventive and Curative Strategies - Dr. Jadcherla 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 18. Faculty Evaluation:Breastfeeding and Substance Abuse - Dr. Hale 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 19. Faculty Evaluation:Calcium, Phosphorus, and Magnesium Metabolism in the Preterm & Term Newborn - Dr. Abrams 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 20. Faculty Evaluation:Calcium, Phosphorus, and Magnesium Metabolism in the Preterm & Term Newborn - Dr. Abrams 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 21. Faculty Evaluation:Sugar, Protein & Brain: NZ research making a difference in Neonatal Care - Dr. Nair 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 22. Faculty Evaluation:I can't be fed that...Feeding in Special Conditions - Dr. Gibson 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 23. Faculty Evaluation:Management of Short Gut - Dr. Stagg 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 24. Faculty Evaluation:Nutrition Panel 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of panel Quality of panel 1 = Poor Quality of panel 2 Quality of panel 3 Quality of panel 4 Quality of panel 5 = Excellent Engagement with the Audience Engagement with the Audience 1 = Poor Engagement with the Audience 2 Engagement with the Audience 3 Engagement with the Audience 4 Engagement with the Audience 5 = Excellent Teaching strategy was effective Teaching strategy was effective 1 = Poor Teaching strategy was effective 2 Teaching strategy was effective 3 Teaching strategy was effective 4 Teaching strategy was effective 5 = Excellent Comment: Andrew Messer Lectureship in Pediatric Neurology Question Title * 25. Faculty Evaluation:The Saga of Neonatal Jaundice - Dr. Vinod K. Bhutani 1 = Poor 2 3 4 5 = Excellent Quality of content Quality of content 1 = Poor Quality of content 2 Quality of content 3 Quality of content 4 Quality of content 5 = Excellent Expertise of the Faculty Expertise of the Faculty 1 = Poor Expertise of the Faculty 2 Expertise of the Faculty 3 Expertise of the Faculty 4 Expertise of the Faculty 5 = Excellent Clarity and Organization Clarity and Organization 1 = Poor Clarity and Organization 2 Clarity and Organization 3 Clarity and Organization 4 Clarity and Organization 5 = Excellent Comment: Question Title * 26. Other Comments: Done
