Evaluation for the 15th International Conference on Long-Term Complications of Treatment of Children and Adolescents for Cancer

June 15–17, 2017

Please take a few minutes to complete this evaluation if you attended the 15th International Conference on Long-Term Complications of Treatment of Children and Adolescents for Cancer, held on June 15th - 17th in Atlanta, Georgia.

Your responses are anonymous. Thank you for your participation!

Question Title

* 1. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Thursday, June 15, Session 1 plenary session.

	Poor	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Excellent	N/A
Dr. Sharon Plon	Dr. Sharon Plon Poor	Dr. Sharon Plon Fair	Dr. Sharon Plon Satisfactory	Dr. Sharon Plon Good	Dr. Sharon Plon Excellent	Dr. Sharon Plon N/A
Dr. Smita Bhatia	Dr. Smita Bhatia Poor	Dr. Smita Bhatia Fair	Dr. Smita Bhatia Satisfactory	Dr. Smita Bhatia Good	Dr. Smita Bhatia Excellent	Dr. Smita Bhatia N/A
Dr. Lindsay M. Morton	Dr. Lindsay M. Morton Poor	Dr. Lindsay M. Morton Fair	Dr. Lindsay M. Morton Satisfactory	Dr. Lindsay M. Morton Good	Dr. Lindsay M. Morton Excellent	Dr. Lindsay M. Morton N/A
Dr. Stephen J. Chanock	Dr. Stephen J. Chanock Poor	Dr. Stephen J. Chanock Fair	Dr. Stephen J. Chanock Satisfactory	Dr. Stephen J. Chanock Good	Dr. Stephen J. Chanock Excellent	Dr. Stephen J. Chanock N/A
Overall Invited Oral Presentations	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Poor	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Fair	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Satisfactory	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Good	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Excellent	Overall Invited Oral Presentations N/A

Question Title

* 2. Provide any comments regarding the oral presentations on Thursday, June 15.

Question Title

* 3. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Friday morning, June 16, Session 2 oral presentations.

	Poor	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Excellent	N/A
Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz	Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz Poor	Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz Fair	Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz Satisfactory	Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz Good	Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz Excellent	Dr. Chaya S. Moskowitz N/A
Dr. Cecile Ronckers	Dr. Cecile Ronckers Poor	Dr. Cecile Ronckers Fair	Dr. Cecile Ronckers Satisfactory	Dr. Cecile Ronckers Good	Dr. Cecile Ronckers Excellent	Dr. Cecile Ronckers N/A
Dr. Smita Bhatia	Dr. Smita Bhatia Poor	Dr. Smita Bhatia Fair	Dr. Smita Bhatia Satisfactory	Dr. Smita Bhatia Good	Dr. Smita Bhatia Excellent	Dr. Smita Bhatia N/A
Dr. Raoul C. Reulen	Dr. Raoul C. Reulen Poor	Dr. Raoul C. Reulen Fair	Dr. Raoul C. Reulen Satisfactory	Dr. Raoul C. Reulen Good	Dr. Raoul C. Reulen Excellent	Dr. Raoul C. Reulen N/A
Dr. Judith L. Kok	Dr. Judith L. Kok Poor	Dr. Judith L. Kok Fair	Dr. Judith L. Kok Satisfactory	Dr. Judith L. Kok Good	Dr. Judith L. Kok Excellent	Dr. Judith L. Kok N/A
Dr. Jop C. Teepen	Dr. Jop C. Teepen Poor	Dr. Jop C. Teepen Fair	Dr. Jop C. Teepen Satisfactory	Dr. Jop C. Teepen Good	Dr. Jop C. Teepen Excellent	Dr. Jop C. Teepen N/A
Dr. I-Chan Huang	Dr. I-Chan Huang Poor	Dr. I-Chan Huang Fair	Dr. I-Chan Huang Satisfactory	Dr. I-Chan Huang Good	Dr. I-Chan Huang Excellent	Dr. I-Chan Huang N/A
Dr. James L. Klosky	Dr. James L. Klosky Poor	Dr. James L. Klosky Fair	Dr. James L. Klosky Satisfactory	Dr. James L. Klosky Good	Dr. James L. Klosky Excellent	Dr. James L. Klosky N/A
Dr. Nickhill Bhakta	Dr. Nickhill Bhakta Poor	Dr. Nickhill Bhakta Fair	Dr. Nickhill Bhakta Satisfactory	Dr. Nickhill Bhakta Good	Dr. Nickhill Bhakta Excellent	Dr. Nickhill Bhakta N/A
Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1)	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1) Poor	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1) Fair	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1) Satisfactory	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1) Good	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1) Excellent	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #1) N/A
Dr. Saro H. Armenian	Dr. Saro H. Armenian Poor	Dr. Saro H. Armenian Fair	Dr. Saro H. Armenian Satisfactory	Dr. Saro H. Armenian Good	Dr. Saro H. Armenian Excellent	Dr. Saro H. Armenian N/A
Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2)	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2) Poor	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2) Fair	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2) Satisfactory	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2) Good	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2) Excellent	Dr. Elisabeth Lieke Feijen (lecture #2) N/A
Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney	Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney Poor	Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney Fair	Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney Satisfactory	Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney Good	Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney Excellent	Dr. Daniel A. Mulrooney N/A
Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1)	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1) Poor	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1) Fair	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1) Satisfactory	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1) Good	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1) Excellent	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #1) N/A
Overall topics and speakers	Overall topics and speakers Poor	Overall topics and speakers Fair	Overall topics and speakers Satisfactory	Overall topics and speakers Good	Overall topics and speakers Excellent	Overall topics and speakers N/A

Question Title

* 4. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Friday afternoon, June 16, Session 3 oral presentations.

	Poor	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Excellent	N/A
Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2)	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2) Poor	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2) Fair	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2) Satisfactory	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2) Good	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2) Excellent	Dr. Todd Gibson (lecture #2) N/A
Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht	Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht Poor	Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht Fair	Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht Satisfactory	Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht Good	Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht Excellent	Dr. Sofie de Fine Licht N/A
Dr. Line Kenborg	Dr. Line Kenborg Poor	Dr. Line Kenborg Fair	Dr. Line Kenborg Satisfactory	Dr. Line Kenborg Good	Dr. Line Kenborg Excellent	Dr. Line Kenborg N/A
Dr. Daniel Zheng	Dr. Daniel Zheng Poor	Dr. Daniel Zheng Fair	Dr. Daniel Zheng Satisfactory	Dr. Daniel Zheng Good	Dr. Daniel Zheng Excellent	Dr. Daniel Zheng N/A
Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips	Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips Poor	Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips Fair	Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips Satisfactory	Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips Good	Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips Excellent	Dr. Nicholas S. Phillips N/A
Dr. Yin Ting Cheung	Dr. Yin Ting Cheung Poor	Dr. Yin Ting Cheung Fair	Dr. Yin Ting Cheung Satisfactory	Dr. Yin Ting Cheung Good	Dr. Yin Ting Cheung Excellent	Dr. Yin Ting Cheung N/A
Dr. Emily Tonorezos	Dr. Emily Tonorezos Poor	Dr. Emily Tonorezos Fair	Dr. Emily Tonorezos Satisfactory	Dr. Emily Tonorezos Good	Dr. Emily Tonorezos Excellent	Dr. Emily Tonorezos N/A
Dr. Marleen van den Berg	Dr. Marleen van den Berg Poor	Dr. Marleen van den Berg Fair	Dr. Marleen van den Berg Satisfactory	Dr. Marleen van den Berg Good	Dr. Marleen van den Berg Excellent	Dr. Marleen van den Berg N/A
Dr. Russell John Brooke	Dr. Russell John Brooke Poor	Dr. Russell John Brooke Fair	Dr. Russell John Brooke Satisfactory	Dr. Russell John Brooke Good	Dr. Russell John Brooke Excellent	Dr. Russell John Brooke N/A
Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt	Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt Poor	Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt Fair	Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt Satisfactory	Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt Good	Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt Excellent	Dr. Hadley Bloomhardt N/A
Dr. Brent T. Weil	Dr. Brent T. Weil Poor	Dr. Brent T. Weil Fair	Dr. Brent T. Weil Satisfactory	Dr. Brent T. Weil Good	Dr. Brent T. Weil Excellent	Dr. Brent T. Weil N/A
Dr. Andrew Dietz	Dr. Andrew Dietz Poor	Dr. Andrew Dietz Fair	Dr. Andrew Dietz Satisfactory	Dr. Andrew Dietz Good	Dr. Andrew Dietz Excellent	Dr. Andrew Dietz N/A
Overall topics and speakers	Overall topics and speakers Poor	Overall topics and speakers Fair	Overall topics and speakers Satisfactory	Overall topics and speakers Good	Overall topics and speakers Excellent	Overall topics and speakers N/A

Question Title

* 5. Provide any comments regarding the presentations on Friday, June 16.

Question Title

* 6. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Saturday, June 16, Session 4 plenary session.

	Poor	Fair	Satisfactory	Good	Excellent	N/A
Dr. Angela Bradbury	Dr. Angela Bradbury Poor	Dr. Angela Bradbury Fair	Dr. Angela Bradbury Satisfactory	Dr. Angela Bradbury Good	Dr. Angela Bradbury Excellent	Dr. Angela Bradbury N/A
Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton	Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton Poor	Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton Fair	Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton Satisfactory	Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton Good	Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton Excellent	Dr. Ellen Wright Clayton N/A
Dr. Courtney P. Lewis	Dr. Courtney P. Lewis Poor	Dr. Courtney P. Lewis Fair	Dr. Courtney P. Lewis Satisfactory	Dr. Courtney P. Lewis Good	Dr. Courtney P. Lewis Excellent	Dr. Courtney P. Lewis N/A
Overall Invited Oral Presentations	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Poor	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Fair	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Satisfactory	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Good	Overall Invited Oral Presentations Excellent	Overall Invited Oral Presentations N/A

Question Title

* 7. Provide any comments regarding the oral presentations on Saturday, June 16.

Question Title

* 8. For the conference overall, did you feel the discussions were educational and much needed?

Yes

Question Title

* 9. Evaluate your satisfaction with the conference.

	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
The program was well organized	The program was well organized Strongly Disagree	The program was well organized Disagree	The program was well organized Neutral	The program was well organized Agree	The program was well organized Strongly Agree
The program met the stated objectives	The program met the stated objectives Strongly Disagree	The program met the stated objectives Disagree	The program met the stated objectives Neutral	The program met the stated objectives Agree	The program met the stated objectives Strongly Agree
The program presented strategies I can use in my practice	The program presented strategies I can use in my practice Strongly Disagree	The program presented strategies I can use in my practice Disagree	The program presented strategies I can use in my practice Neutral	The program presented strategies I can use in my practice Agree	The program presented strategies I can use in my practice Strongly Agree
The information was presented at an appropriate academic level	The information was presented at an appropriate academic level Strongly Disagree	The information was presented at an appropriate academic level Disagree	The information was presented at an appropriate academic level Neutral	The information was presented at an appropriate academic level Agree	The information was presented at an appropriate academic level Strongly Agree

Question Title

* 10. Please explain your choices of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with each of the conference characteristics. If you disagree with the information presented being appropriate for an academic level, please explain further.

Question Title

* 11. What do you feel was most beneficial about the conference?

Question Title

* 12. What topic(s) would you suggest for the next conference?

Question Title

* 13. How do you feel this conference can be improved?

Question Title

* 14. If a similar conference was held in the future, would you be likely to attend?

Yes

Question Title

* 15. Would you attend this conference if CME credit was not offered?

Yes

Question Title

* 16. Would you recommend the International Long-Term Conference to a friend or colleague?

Yes

Question Title

* 1. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Thursday, June 15, Session 1 plenary session.

Question Title

* 2. Provide any comments regarding the oral presentations on Thursday, June 15.

Question Title

* 3. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Friday morning, June 16, Session 2 oral presentations.

Question Title

* 4. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Friday afternoon, June 16, Session 3 oral presentations.

Question Title

* 5. Provide any comments regarding the presentations on Friday, June 16.

Question Title

* 6. Evaluate each speakers' topic and presentation for the Saturday, June 16, Session 4 plenary session.

Question Title

* 7. Provide any comments regarding the oral presentations on Saturday, June 16.

Question Title

* 8. For the conference overall, did you feel the discussions were educational and much needed?

Question Title

* 9. Evaluate your satisfaction with the conference.

Question Title

* 10. Please explain your choices of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with each of the conference characteristics. If you disagree with the information presented being appropriate for an academic level, please explain further.

Question Title

* 11. What do you feel was most beneficial about the conference?

Question Title

* 12. What topic(s) would you suggest for the next conference?

Question Title

* 13. How do you feel this conference can be improved?

Question Title

* 14. If a similar conference was held in the future, would you be likely to attend?

Question Title

* 15. Would you attend this conference if CME credit was not offered?

Question Title

* 16. Would you recommend the International Long-Term Conference to a friend or colleague?

Question Title

* 17. Please provide any additional comments or feedback.