Summary evaluation of the 2006 GP & PHC Research Conference
5-7 July 2006
Perth Convention Centre
... a very polished conference - very well thought through from broad structure to points of detail - delegates' time was maximised. 08090T
Themed Optimising Impact and held at the Perth Convention Centre, the 2006 GP & PHC Research Conference included an excellent array of speakers, plenary sessions, workshops and concurrent sessions which were enjoyed by the 312 delegates from Australia and the world.
On-line evaluations were submitted by 193 of the 312 delegates who attended - a response rate of 62%. Below is a summary of what the delegates said about the conference.
Delegates who submitted an evaluation were primarily academics, research officers and project officers and most worked at universities.
Over 90% rated the quality of keynote presentations as excellent or good.
I thought that the presentations generally were very good. In particular I appreciated the input of the invited keynote speakers into the whole conference..They had a lot to add to the overall success of the conference. Their attendance was very generous and I hope appreciated. (08WHHR)
Thought provoking insights and opinions (0GOOJ6)
Nearly 80% of respondents rated plenary sessions as excellent or good forums for knowledge exchange.
Good speakers. Use of comparison in general practice in the US, UK and Holland was brilliant! (0WGG37)
Over 80% of respondents rated concurrent paper sessions as excellent or good forums for knowledge exchange.
Sessions were very tightly run and presenters had taken great care in getting material together. (GG8GVM)
Over 80% of respondents rated the poster display as an excellent or good forum for knowledge exchange.
It is always a diversion for morning tea and a conversation opener over dinner. (GG0HBD)
Poster presenters were able to give me a really solid understanding of their work because of the one-on-one interaction. Some presenters also supplied handouts - I found these very useful to look over in greater detail in my own time. (0O83PK)
What was best about the conference
Over 40% of delegates indicated that networking was what they liked best about this conference.
I loved the networking tables. This should be done for every day of the conference. It makes you go out and meet people. (O8G9HX)
. Good move to have all three keynote international speakers together in the first plenary, with the Department speaker. Visible product of collaboration with APHCRI and AAAGP. Excellent move to elevate several proffered abstracts to plenary presentations, to give the stage to otherwise little known people/projects. (OWWQZR)
I really enjoyed the thoughtful speakers, and the range of keynote speakers, and the fact that they mixed around with us and we could speak to them out of the sessions.....also enjoyed all the informal and formal networking opportunities. (OG8A9B)
Suggestions to improve the conference
Many respondents requested that there be less concurrent sessions but recognised that it was difficult to get the balance right between providing sufficient opportunities for papers to be presented as well as ensuring that there would be a reasonable sized audience present at each session.
The sessions I was able to attend were good for the most part. However, the eight parallel sessions were too much - I missed out on talks I would have like to have the opportunity to hear. (00GP02)
Some respondents thought the conference was too GP focused rather than inclusive of broad primary health care, and would like Australian leaders in primary care research to be keynote speakers.
Workshop evaluation
Six pre-conference workshops were held prior to the opening of the main conference. A total of 172 people attended these workshops and 115 returned their evaluation forms - a 67% response rate.
The attendees were overwhelmingly academics and research officers with the next highest group being GPs. Most were employed in a university.
The workshops met the expectations of 64 (56%) people and 40 (35%) had their expectations partially met. Most (94%) respondents rated the workshops as giving them a moderately or considerably better understanding of the topic. The same number believed that the workshop was considerably or moderately relevant to their work. The quality of content was rated as excellent or good by 87% of respondents.
Workshop was very thought provoking and certainly adds to my continued learning.
The Primary Health Care Research & Information Service (PHC RIS), based in the Department of General Practice at Flinders University, in collaboration with the Australian Association for Academic General Practice (AAAGP) and the Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute (APHCRI) convened the 2006 GP & PHC Research Conference.
A more detailed evaluation report can be found at www.phcris.org.au/conference/2006/
|
print version
email this page
