Feed-back form for evaluation of ESCAIDE 20091) What is your country of residence?
2) Where do you work?
3) Which describes best your current profession?
4) How did you first hear about the ESCAIDE?
5) Were you an invited participant (travel and registration arranged by ECDC/EPIET)?
Conference EvaluationPre Conference Organisation6) Please evaluate the following Timing of information received before the conference
Accuracy of information received before the conference
Timing of Call for Abstracts
Timing of final program published
Conference registration procedure
Abstract submission procedure
Guidelines for presenters and moderators
7) Your comments on the pre-conference organisation:
Overall Conference organisation8) Please evaluate the following Overall quality of the ESCAIDE?
Overall relevance of topics to your work?
Overall transparency and fairness in the planning and implementation of ESCAIDE 2009?
ESCAIDE 2009 as a learning experience?
ESCADIE 2009 as a mechanism to change your current practises?
9) Your comments on the overall quality of the ESCAIDE
10) Which plenary session did you enjoy most? (please tick only one)
11) Why did you enjoy this plenary session most?
12) Which parallel session did you enjoy most? (please tick maximum of three)
13) Why did you enjoy this/these parallel sessions most?
Conference scheduling14) Please evaluate the following aspects of conference scheduling Start and finish time of the daily sessions
Having parallel sessions
Ease of choice between parallel sessions
Balance between plenary and parallel sessions
Opportunities for informal contact with other participants
Time allocated to poster sessions
15) Your comments on the conference scheduling
16) Please evaluate the following aspects of the Plenary sessions: Number of presentations in each plenary session
The time allocated for panel discussions in the plenary sessions
17) Would you prefer more 'review' style plenary presentations
18) Please suggest topics for plenary sessions at ESCAIDE 2010:
19) Please evaluate the following aspects of the parallel sessions: Amount of time allocated to each presentation (10 minutes each)
The time allocated for question & answers in the plenary sessions
20) Please give any comments on the parallel sessions
21) Please evaluate the following aspects of the poster sessions: Clarity of poster session topics
Poster room layout
Lack of moderation in the poster sessions
22) Please give any comments on the poster sessions
Conference materials23) Please evaluate the following conference material: Quality of ESCAIDE abstract book
Quality of the ESCAIDE programme
Quality of the additional conference material (bags, USB’s, pens etc)
24) Please give any comments on the conference material
General conference arrangements25) Please evaluate the following: General conference arrangements
Suitability of the location (Stockholm)
Suitability of venue (Munchen Bryggeriet)
Overall suitability of conference rooms & facilities
Standard of lunches provided
Standard of coffee breaks provided
On-site help with enquiries regarding the conference / local information
Quality of the EPIET/ESCAIDE After Party (Parken III)
26) Please give any comments on the general conference arrangements
27) Do you intend to attend the ESCAIDE next year?
28) Additional comments/suggestions/constructive criticism:
|