Table 1.
Item (n, response rate) | Strongly Agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | N/A |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
This educational event improved my professional competencies (n = 228, 36%) | 35 (15%) | 161 (71%) | 29 (13%) | 1 (0.4%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (0.9%) |
Participating in this educational event will improve my professional performance (n = 228, 36%) | 27 (12%) | 146 (64%) | 50 (22%) | 1 (0.4%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (2%) |
I will make changes to my professional practice based on what I learned (n = 224, 35%) | 20 (9%) | 147 (66%) | 50 (22%) | 3 (1%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (2%) |
I was motivated to learn more about complementary and integrative medicine (n = 228, 36%) | 55 (24%) | 133 (58%) | 30 (13%) | 8 (4%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (0.9%) |
I was stimulated to integrate complementary therapies into my professional practice (n = 228, 36%) | 35 (15%) | 116 (51%) | 63 (28%) | 10 (4%) | 1 (0.4%) | 3 (1%) |
Overall, the virtual educational event met my expectations (n = 227, 36%) | 39 (17%) | 134 (59%) | 45 (20%) | 5 (2%) | 1 (0.4%) | 3 (1%) |
After attending the event, I am able to address individual needs in compliance with my continuing professional development plan (n = 140, 22%) | 12 (9%) | 72 (51%) | 40 (29%) | 3 (2%) | 1 (0.7%) | 12 (9%) |
The overall quality of the speakers / faculty was excellent (n = 227, 36%) | 49 (22%) | 150 (66%) | 23 (10%) | 3 (1%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (0.9%) |
The scientific / educational content was of high quality (n = 224, 35%) | 41 (18%) | 142 (62%) | 33 (14%) | 4 (2%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (2%) |
The scientific / educational content was evidence based (n = 225, 36%) | 30 (13%) | 126 (56%) | 59 (26%) | 3 (1%) | 1 (0.4%) | 6 (3%) |
The accredited content was balanced, objective, and free from commercial bias (n = 227, 36%) | 40 (18%) | 137 (60%) | 41 (18%) | 1 (0.4%) | 0 (0%) | 8 (4%) |
I would recommend this educational event to others (n = 225, 36%) | 44 (20%) | 136 (60%) | 38 (17%) | 1 (0.4%) | 2 (0.9%) | 4 (2%) |
Abbreviation: N/A Not applicable. Note: Percentages may add to +/− 100 due to rounding