Table 1 Attendees’ preferences for both in-person and virtual components of hybrid conferences
From: Voices of conference attendees: how should future hybrid conferences be designed?
In-person Component (Total N = 503) | Virtual Component (Total N = 486) | |
|---|---|---|
Code from directed content analysis | % (N)* | % (N)* |
Clinical skills sessions | 26.2** (N = 132) | 4.5 (N = 22) |
Similar to previous ERS in-person congresses (Congress included: Live plenaries of experts’ presentations e.g., latest scientific advancements, clinical debates and case discussions) | 15.7 (N = 79) | |
Opportunities for interaction between all members (e.g., attendees, speakers, patients) | 13.5 (N = 68) | 8.6 (N = 42) |
Clinical debate sessions | 11.7 (N = 59) | 6.6 (N = 32) |
Clinical knowledge update sessions | 9.3 (N = 47) | 10.1 (N = 49) |
Opportunities to interact with experts | 6.8 (N = 34) | |
Clinical case discussions | 4.8 (N = 23) | 19.8** (N = 96) |
Poster and oral presentation sessions | 4.8 (N = 24) | 9.5** (N = 46) |
Workshops facilitating interaction between attendees and speakers | 3.8 (N = 19) | 1.2 (N = 6) |
Better access to simultaneously virtually stream the in-person conference at | 2.5 (N = 13) | |
Consideration of different time zones/languages | 0.9 (N = 5) | |
Similar to ERS virtual congress 2021 (Congress included: Live streaming online of experts’ presentations e.g., latest scientific advancements, clinical debates and case discussions) | 24.3 (N = 118) | |
Recordings available for longer | 6.8 (N = 33) | |
Increased variation of topics | 3.3 (N = 16) | |
Expert speaker presentations | 3.2 (N = 16) | |
Technical Improvements | 2.1 (N = 10) |