Medical Education Conference Research Articles

Negotiation Skills for Medical Educators.

Medical education is expensive.1 The expense is sometimes borne by learners and their families, sometimes by institutions, and sometimes by governments.2 Graduate medical education is no different from other forms of medical education in terms of its expense. There is the cost of curriculum development and delivery for residents, the cost of resources (such as equipment, technology, or e-learning resources), the cost of assessment (be it formative or summative), and the cost of program evaluation.3 In this article, assessment means assessing the learners, whereas evaluation means evaluating the course, curriculum, or program. Some of these costs are sunk costs; some are fixed costs. However, others are negotiable. For example, the costs of resources provided by the institution—like simulation equipment—are often negotiable. Institutional purchasers and commercial providers of such equipment can negotiate on price, amount, or a number of other variables. Commercial providers understand negotiation skills, and many of their staff will have been trained in these skills. Those responsible for the purchase, however, are less likely to have a commercial background, so they are less likely to have the skills necessary to ensure the best possible deal for their institution and learners. The purpose of this perspective is to introduce the topic of negotiation for those who are responsible for ensuring that their institution gets the best possible value for its purchases. Sometimes medical educators need to negotiate for space and/or time in the curriculum, and negotiation skills are needed in those circumstances as well.

Intellectual property and the internet

From my recent experience of teaching and assessing, and attending national and international medical education conferences, it has become clear to me that the ease of search and replication, occasional absence of details such as date, copyright notice or an obvious author, coupled with the fact that Google is a search engine and not a repository of free images, is poorly understood by clinical students, clinicians and academics alike. All are arguably aware of the implications of plagiarism and the importance of permission and acknowledgement for the contribution made in research and publications.

Poster Exhibitions at Conferences: Are We Doing it Properly?

Literature exploring the educational value and quality of conference poster presentation is scarce. The aim of this study was to identify and describe the variation in poster exhibitions across a spectrum of conferences attended by trainees. Prospective observational assessment of conference posters was carried out across 7 variables at 4 conferences attended by surgical trainees in 2012. Posters were compared by individual variables and according to overall poster score combining all 7 variables examined. The number of authors listed was also compared. Random samples of consecutively numbered posters were examined at the exhibitions of 4 conferences, which included a UK national medical education conference (Association for the Study of Medical Education), a UK international surgical conference (Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland), a European oncology conference (European Society of Surgical Oncology), and a North American joint medical and surgical conference (Digestive Diseases Week). Significant variation existed between conferences in posters and their presentation. The proportion of presenters failing to display their posters ranged from 3% to 26% (p < 0.0001). Adherence to size guidelines varied from 89% to 100% (p = 0.002). The inclusion of references ranged from 19% to 82% (p < 0.0001). The presence of a presenting author during the allocated session varied widely from 21% to 86% (p < 0.0001). No significant variation was observed in the proportion of posters that were formatted using aims, methods, results, and conclusion sections (81%-93%; p = 0.513) or in the proportion of posters that were identified as difficult to read (24%-28%; p = 0.919). Association for the Study of Medical Education outperformed each of the other exhibitions overall (p < 0.0001). Posters with greater than the median of 4 authors performed significantly better across all areas (p < 0.0001-0.042) except presenter attendance (p = 0.480). Poster exhibitions varied widely, with room for improvement at all 4 conferences. Lessons can be learned by all conferences from each other to improve presenter engagement with and the educational value of poster exhibitions.

Thailand's health ambitions pay off.

Q: Thailand has a long tradition of investing in health, why? A: Over the last decades, we have built and maintained leadership among health professionals with a strong sense of commitment. At medical and health schools in our country, we learn the teachings of Prince Mahidol. His Royal Highness, the father of our King, is considered the father of modern medicine and health in He taught us to interests first and self-interest second. He said: don't want you to be only a doctor, I also want you to be a man. Health professionals learn his teachings by heart. Every seven years we have a national medical education conference and in 1982 it adopted a resolution that medical gradates should be four things: skilled clinicians so that they can more or less alone in rural hospitals; good teachers as they must train community health workers and volunteers; good managers as they must manage district hospitals; and good supporters of primary health care. Q: Thailand is one of the first developing countries to make major progress towards universal health coverage. Why did it pursue this goal in the midst of economic crises? A: The drive towards universal health coverage came hand-in-hand with democracy. After the student revolt against the military government in 1973 and our first democratic elections in 1975, the new government made health services available free of charge to the poor. We then started to improve health insurance coverage for people with low-incomes, the formally employed, children and the elderly. It took us from 1975 to the year 2000, to move from zero to 71% of the population covered by health insurance. Then, in the 2000 election, one of the parties promised to move from 71% to 100%--full coverage--if elected. Within a year of their victory, we closed the 29% gap and on 1 January 2002 the whole population was covered. This was largely thanks to the late Dr Sanguan Nitayaramphong, the first secretary-general of Thailand's National Health Security Office, who worked tirelessly to persuade politicians and the to embrace universal health coverage. He is considered the Father of universal health coverage in Thailand. Q: How did Thailand achieve 71 % coverage in spite of the financial crises of the 1980s and 1990s? A: When the government started to provide free health care to the poor in 1975, we soon found that service access was poor because there weren't enough rural health facilities. In the spirit of the times--of primary health care and health for all--our government started to construct more district hospitals in rural areas. In 1981, annual GDP was about US$ 390 per capita, we were a low-income country facing economic downturn. We had to negotiate an International Monetary Fund loan and had a zero growth budget for five years. Despite this, our government took the courageous decision to continue expanding the rural health infrastructure. Q: How? A: The government froze all new capital investment in urban hospitals from 1982 to 1986 and invested these funds in building rural district hospitals and health centres as well as mass training and employment of doctors and community health workers. Before this, the health ministry budget for these districts was lower than in urban provinces. After 1982, it was higher, and this trend continues today. We established a compulsory public work placement of three years for medical graduates and four years for nursing graduates. We strengthened primary health care by recruiting and training volunteers in villages across the country. Today, we have about one million volunteers. So our government put us on the path to universal health coverage by investing in the rural health infrastructure. Q: Why was health policy a vote winner in the 2000 general election? A: People wanted to have access to essential health services of good quality without facing financial ruin. …

Nipping an education myth in the bud: Poh’s brain activity during lectures

The debate around the value of lectures is raging strongly, and new empirical data arguing against the value of lectures comes from a chart showing student brain activity during lectures. The evidence from the chart, however, suffers from crucial problems. These include a small and unspecific sample, mislabeling of the student activities, and a misinterpretation of the type of measurement. This chart has appeared on the Internet, in education conferences and journals, and recently at a medical education conference. For medical education to be taken seriously, it is crucial that researchers apply the same standards that they would to clinical research. As a result, this chart should be avoided in the debate on the value of lectures before it has a chance to follow a pattern in medical education set by other myths.

The hidden curriculum: Is it time to re-consider the concept?

The concept of ‘‘the hidden curriculum’’ has become a part of the everyday discourse of medical education. With roots in the broader field of education, the concept has had a significant influence on medical education since Hafferty & Franks brought it to our attention (1994). Twenty years later, this personal view paper problematizes the concept and discusses whether ‘‘the hidden curriculum’’ is a concept that has run its course. Reflecting on my experience at a recent medical education conference, I realize that perhaps the most striking learning experience for me was, as they often are, an informal one. Time and time again, I heard conference delegates use phrases like: What can you do? It’s the hidden curriculum in action. Oh, it’s probably because of the hidden curriculum. That’s bad! Talk about hidden curriculum! ‘‘The hidden curriculum’’ rolled off the tongues of medical educators from across the country: established and emerging, clinical and non-clinical. It was referred to in plenary sessions as well as in countless oral and poster presentations. The hidden curriculum was such a prevalent discourse of my conference experience that I found myself thinking about it conceptually. As a recent convert to the power of social media for

The value of prostate cancer support groups: a pilot study of primary physicians’ perspectives

BackgroundIn Canada, prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common male cancer, and prostate cancer support groups (PCSGs) have prevailed for more than 20 years providing support to men with PCa and their families. While the format, focus and benefits of attending PCSGs have been reported little is known about primary physicians’ (PPs) perceptions of these groups. This article describes Canadian primary physicians’ views about face-to-face and web-based PCSGs.MethodsCanadian based primary physicians (n = 140) attending a 2012 Continuing Medical Education Conference participated in a pilot survey questionnaire study. The 56-item questionnaire used in this study included six sets of attitudinal items to measure primary physicians’ beliefs about positive and negative influences of PCSGs, reasons for attending PCSGs, the attributes of effective PCSGs, and the value of face-to-face and web-based PCSGs.ResultsResults showed that PCSGs were positively valued, particularly for information sharing, education and psychosocial support. Poor inclusivity, privacy, and accessibility were identified as potential barriers, and recommendations were made for better marketing and web-based PCSGs to increase engagement with potential attendees.ConclusionsFindings suggest PPs highly valued the role and potential benefits of PCSGs. Information provision and an educational role were perceived as key benefits amid the need to improve local and provincial marketing of PCSGs. The potential for web-based PCSGs to help in the support of PCa patients was also recognized.

Publication of Results of Abstracts Presented at Medical Education Conferences

Publication of Results of Abstracts Presented at Medical Education Conferences

Proceedings of the 5th Annual Perspectives in Rheumatic Diseases

ObjectivesUpdate on rheumatic diseases and their intersection with dermatology. ResultsThis continuing medical education conference included more than 25 presentations and interactive sessions from leading experts in managing rheumatic diseases, comorbid conditions and related dermatologic diseases. Multiple areas were discussed, including: treating newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis; comparing Biologics in rheumatoid arthritis; examining changed approaches to treating SLE, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, gout and vasculitis. Also visited were new understandings regarding chronic pain and osteoporosis. ConclusionsMultiple presentations and interactive sessions from leading experts in the management of rheumatic diseases emphasized the interconnection between rheumatology and dermatology. Practical management approaches to both specialties and their sequelae were discussed. Additional content from the conference is available at www.globalacademycme.com and through Rheumatology News at www.rheumatologynews.com.

Abstracts

Medical EducationVolume 47, Issue s2 p. 1-15 abstracts Abstracts First published: 28 August 2013 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12294AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Volume47, Issues2Special Issue: Abstracts of the 10th Asia Pacific Medical Education Conference(APMEC), National University of Singapore, Singapore, 16–20 January 2013September 2013Pages 1-15 RelatedInformation

Author index

Medical EducationVolume 47, Issue s2 p. 16-16 author index Author index First published: 28 August 2013 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12315Citations: 1AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article.Citing Literature Volume47, Issues2Special Issue: Abstracts of the 10th Asia Pacific Medical Education Conference(APMEC), National University of Singapore, Singapore, 16–20 January 2013September 2013Pages 16-16 RelatedInformation

Primary care physicians’ knowledge of the ophthalmic effects of diabetes

ObjectivePrevious studies suggest that many patients with diabetes do not receive an annual dilated eye examination because of a lack of referrals from primary care physicians (PCPs). This study aims to determine the depth of knowledge of PCPs regarding diabetic eye disease. DesignCross-sectional assessment. ParticipantsNinety-seven PCPs. MethodsAn 8-question, multiple-choice assessment was administered over a 3-month period to 208 PCPs in attendance at continuing medical education conferences. ResultsNinety-seven PCPs completed the assessment. Participants had a mean total score of 5.9 of 8 possible (73.8%). Questions regarding screening, clinical findings, and prevention were answered correctly by ≥81% of the respondents. However, questions regarding risk factors and complications were answered correctly by less than 35% of the respondents. No difference in scores was found based on the type of residency training received or the number of years in practice. ConclusionsAlthough PCPs may require greater education in the complications and risk factors of diabetic eye disease, study participants demonstrated a good overall depth of knowledge regarding diabetic eye disease. Thus, previous reports of only 35% to 55% of patients with diabetes receiving an annual dilated fundus examination are likely not due to a lack of physician education.

Edgar Dale's Pyramid of Learning in medical education: A literature review

Background: Edgar Dale's Pyramid of Learning and percentages of retained learning are cited in educational literature in a range of disciplines. The sources of the Pyramid, however, are misleading.Aims: To examine the evidence supporting the Pyramid and the extent to which it is cited in medical education literature.Methods: A review of literature (1946–2012) based on a search utilising Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Medline and Google Scholar conducted from September to November 2012.Results: A total of 43 peer-reviewed medical education journal articles and conference papers were found. While some researchers had been misled by their sources, other authors’ interpretations of the citations did not align with the content of those citations, had no such citations, had circular references, or consulted questionable sources. There was no agreement on the percentages of learning retention, in spite of many researchers’ citing primary texts.Discussion and conclusion: The inappropriate citing of the Pyramid and its associated percentages in medical education literature is widespread and continuous. This citing undermines much of the published work, and impacts on research-based medical education literature. While the area of learning/teaching strategies and amount of retention from each is an area for future research, any reference to the Pyramid should be avoided.

Improving Written Sign-Outs Through Education and Structured Audit: The UPDATED Approach

Allison S. DeKosky, MD, is Instructor of Clinical Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania Health System; Ananya Gangopadhyaya, MD, is Assistant Professor of General Internal Medicine at the University of Illinois Chicago Medical Center; Bobby Chan, MD, practices Family Medicine at MacNeal Hospital; and Vineet M. Arora, MD, MAPP, is Associate Professor of General Internal Medicine at the University of Illinois Chicago Medical Center. Drs DeKosky and Gangopadhyaya contributed equally to this research as joint first authors. Presented in the plenary session at the 2011 Midwest Society for General Internal Medicine Regional Meeting, Chicago, IL, September 15; at the 2012 Association for Hospital Medical Education Conference, Fort Lauderdale, FL, May 18; and as an oral presentation at the 2012 California-Hawaii Society of General Internal Medicine Meeting, San Francisco, CA, January 21.

Riding the wave

The Asia Pacific Medical Education Conference (APMEC) held in January this year celebrated 10 years of continued success. Hosted by the Medical Education Unit at the National University of Singapore Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, the APMEC has grown to become the premier annual medical education event in the eastern hemisphere. One striking feature of the conference was the confluence of themes presented by the keynote speakers, most of whom were visiting from the West. No fewer than three referred to a compelling 2010 paper in the Lancet that warned of dire consequences if we continue to give our students fragmented teaching from the isolation of our disciplinary silos.1 Fittingly, the winner of the conference's prize for the best oral presentation (Dr Ngim Chin Fang from Monash University, Malaysia) addressed exactly this issue by describing an innovative programme that brings together major clinical specialties such as paediatrics, obstetrics & gynaecology, psychiatry and general practice to teach a case-based model that is both effective and sustainable.2 Another frequent refrain at the APMEC conference was that the medical educator needs to reconsider their teaching style. It is 20 years since Alison King coined the phrase ‘from sage on the stage to guide on the side’, reminding us that educating contemporary students is less about transmitting knowledge in didactic lecture format, and more about facilitating active learning through a variety of student-centred techniques.3 One thing that is more apparent in 2013 than it was in 1993 is that the clinical teacher is at risk of becoming not so much a ‘sage on the stage’ or a ‘guide on the side’ as a ‘…”pleb” on the Web’. The shift to online-learning Web 2.0 applications such as video sharing, social media and blogs, and massive open online courses (MOOCs) means that students are able to access the knowledge content of their courses from a huge variety of sources beyond the control of a set curriculum. Rather than reducing the role of the clinical teacher to a disembodied voice on the Internet, this change in the origins of student knowledge confirms the clinical teacher's role as the source of wisdom. Being the font of all knowledge was always a limiting role for the clinical teacher; now that the World Wide Web has assumed that dubious distinction, the clinical teacher is free to work with the student in sorting, appraising and assimilating that knowledge into meaningful understanding. After all, information management is what clinicians do best. This issue of The Clinical Teacher has amongst its themes a collection of papers on the varied roles that clinical learners can play in facilitating their own education and developing their teaching skills. As digital natives, today's students are well placed to integrate information from this melange of media. Alexopoulos et al. from Imperial College in London have discovered that 82 per cent of UK medical schools are offering teacher training to their students, indicating that this skill set is being seen as a valuable one for contemporary practice.4 Qureshi and colleagues from Edinburgh have found that junior doctors are highly valued by their junior peers as bedside teachers, perhaps not having the wisdom of an experienced clinical teacher, but making up for it in approachability and awareness of what's relevant.5 And Nwosu and colleagues from Liverpool have given students the novel role of writing their own examination questions as a way of ensuring that they engage with the aged care curriculum.6 All of these initiatives develop the students’ qualities as educators, ready to undertake this aspect of their future role on their own terms. It is easy to see that today's student – connected as they are to so many sources of information – need to become expert in knowledge management for the benefit of both their future patients and learners. They need to become vital nodes in the information network that flows around us all. In their first week of medical school, students at this university are challenged to work in their peer learning groups to construct a definition of ‘the good doctor’ after a range of activities exposing them to role models, both good and bad. The qualities that they use to define doctors who are ‘good’ are combined, analysed for frequency and presented back to the entire year level of 330 students as a ‘word cloud’, with the predominant words displayed most prominently. This year, ‘knowledge’ and ‘competence’ made modest showings, but one word dominated the word cloud by a significant margin. One word that, in the eyes of these novitiates to the profession, represented the quality that most distinguishes good doctors from the rest: ‘communication’. When they start work in 2017, these new doctors will understand that a key aspect of doing their job well is facilitating the transfer of information: as it ever was.

SIMEC 2012: Sharing great ideas in medical education, April 22–26, 2012, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Reflection Report

SIMEC 2012 has been a life-changing experience for me in my professional career. As a novice in academia this is the first medical education conference I have attended, and it has personal meaning and pride in view of the fact that it was held in an Arab country so close to my own. Meeting experts from around the world, and interacting with other novices like me has been a humbling and inspiring experience. The immense zest of energy I had when I left Riyadh, to develop myself professionally in Medical Education, and to contribute in a positive and innovative manner in my medical institution and community was refreshing.

Health providers opinions on the utility of the HPV vaccination-Are guidelines being Followed?

Background: For the first time in woman’s health we are able to prevent cervical cancer caused by Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). However, the opinions of healthcare providers are easily translated into practice of distribution of the HPV vaccination. Here, we identify important areas of bias that have the potential to limit distribution to indicated populations. Aims & Objective: We sought to evaluate medical provider’s knowledge and personal beliefs regarding the indication for the HPV vaccination through an 8-question survey. Material and Methods: The survey was distributed to women’s healthcare providers at a series of continuing medical education (CME) conferences from 2011-2012. Each question was structured to reveal potential bias in the guidelinebased distribution of the vaccination. Results: We identified four patient populations that met the criteria for vaccination that had a low level of recommendation (50-82%). Overall, there were high levels of recommendation for populations that were before or at sexual debut (95-99%). Two groups identified as having a low level of recommendation included sexually active female patients with documented cervical dysplasia (76-82%). Other groups with low levels of recommendation included a married woman within the recommended 12-26 age range (60%) and a male patient with exposure to genital warts (50%). Conclusion: There is clear evidence that healthcare providers have a significant impact on acceptance and motivation of patients receiving the HPV vaccination. This study shows biases and lack of knowledge of the guidelines for HPV vaccine use impact recommendations of healthcare providers providing the vaccine to their patients. Key-Words: Human Papilloma Virus; Vaccination; Acceptance; Guidelines

Limitations of poster presentations reporting educational innovations at a major international medical education conference

Background: In most areas of medical research, the label of ‘quality’ is associated with well-accepted standards. Whilst its interpretation in the field of medical education is contentious, there is agreement on the key elements required when reporting novel teaching strategies. We set out to assess if these features had been fulfilled by poster presentations at a major international medical education conference.Methods: Such posters were analysed in four key areas: reporting of theoretical underpinning, explanation of instructional design methods, descriptions of the resources needed for introduction, and the offering of materials to support dissemination.Results: Three hundred and twelve posters were reviewed with 170 suitable for analysis. Forty-one percent described their methods of instruction or innovation design. Thirty-three percent gave details of equipment, and 29% of studies described resources that may be required for delivering such an intervention. Further resources to support dissemination of their innovation were offered by 36%. Twenty-three percent described the theoretical underpinning or conceptual frameworks upon which their work was based.Conclusions: These findings suggest that posters presenting educational innovation are currently limited in what they offer to educators. Presenters should seek to enhance their reporting of these crucial aspects by employing existing published guidance, and organising committees may wish to consider explicitly requesting such information at the time of initial submission.

Social Media: New Opportunities, New Ethical Concerns

The disclosure of potential conflicts is standard in the medical literature, in both print and electronic media, as well as in presentations such as Grand Rounds and continuing medical education (CME) conferences. While frequently pro forma, these disclosures help reassure the audience that even if bias cannot be eliminated, it can be managed—that is, mentally adjusted out, a bit like confounders in a regression. However, in the realm of social media, such disclosure is not yet the standard. Social media presents some unique challenges. The presenter is not necessarily known, and information about the presenter may be limited or absent. In lieu of a didactic lecture, information may flow bi-directionally. References to support statements may not be provided. The presentation style may be informal. The audience may include laypersons; for some platforms this is quite intentional. In these and many other ways, presentation of medical information and advice is still evolving; social media force us to rethink how we, our patients, and the lay public consume medical information. In this issue of JGIM, DeCamp presents an important perspective on addressing some concerns regarding disclosure of conflicts of interest in social media.1 He presents some examples of conflicts of interest, summarizes current guidelines, and provides a framework for managing disclosures in social media. In so doing, he highlights how consumers of social media are vulnerable to both overt and hidden conflicts of interest. This piece also heralds other concerns that may rise to prominence as social media continue to mature. For example, does the general public understand and interpret potential conflicts in the same way that medical professionals do? A blogger’s disclosure that he received a grant from a pharmaceutical company may not set off the right alarms if the reader is unaware that the new medication mentioned in the blog is in fact the pro-drug of a medication about to go off-patent—and that both drugs are produced by that same company. In this case, disclosure may have to involve more than a statement about funding. In 140 characters (or even 140 words), how much explanation to frame the disclosure is reasonable or feasible? The malleability of social media is both a curse and a blessing. It is a curse because content can change dramatically from day to day, making it difficult for readers to assess the provenance of scholarly material. On the other hand, authors and editors are empowered to post information on conflicts of interest as they arise, almost in real time. As both contributors to and consumers of the information shared in social media, we can demand more effective disclosure. We can post information regarding the role of conflicts in the presentation of medical information. And, perhaps ironically, we can use social media outlets themselves to promote the need for complete disclosure of conflicts of interest. Also in this issue, JGIM conducts an interview with executives from HelloHealth, a for-profit company working to transform (and reinvigorate) primary care.2 HelloHealth emphasizes use of health IT, clinical email, and telemedicine, and targets small-size and medium-size practices working in a fee-for-service environment. This approach appears to run at cross-purposes with the national movement to implement Accountable Care Organizations and other versions of “Capitation 2.0.” Nevertheless, the problems faced by primary care are unlikely to yield to a single strategy; as in diagnosis of a complex clinical case, it would be foolish to reach premature closure. Other research offerings this month include an evaluation of whether health information exchange can improve headache care in the emergency department;3 a study examining effects of an electronic health record system on providers’ patient safety perceptions;4 and an examination of the differential impact of academic culture on men and women,5 among many others. Plus, don’t miss the Editorial by J. Michael McWilliams and the Comment by Robert Brook. We hope you find this month’s content to be of interest, but either way, the Editors want to hear from you. We welcome letters-to-the-editor and email; we’re also on Twitter (@jgimeditor). Before you use social media, however, do be sure to think about (if not declare) your conflicts of interest.

OA05.01. Altering nutrition-related behaviors of healthcare professionals through CME involving nutrition experts and chefs

Purpose For healthcare professionals, practicing a healthful behavior oneself is a powerful predictor of counseling patients about these same self-care behaviors (e.g. exercise, wearing seat belts, etc). We explored the feasibility of altering healthcare professionals’ personal and professional behaviors with regard to diet, food preparation, and their ability to advise patients who are overweight or obese as a result of a four-day continuing medical education (CME) conference, “Healthy Kitchens, Healthy Lives–Caring for Our Patients and Ourselves,” which combines both medical and culinary education.