Theme 1: The main motivations underlying attendees’ desire to attend in-person conferences were scientific updates, interaction with peers and colleagues, and fostering inspiration/enthusiasm in an academic field. Description: Stakeholders believed that scientific updates are the main factor motivating in-person conference attendance with latest advancements and new knowledge being highlighted. Noted alongside this theme was the value of networking, meeting other people, forming new collaborative links and, for younger members, joining and integrating into the community. Personal encouragement of an individual’s career or inspiration to implement changes and ideas for new avenues of others were also expected to be fostered. |
“The main motivation is, of course, apart from to be updated about the last advances in a specific field, probably the main motivation is to meet people and to create networks of collaborations.” – Stakeholder 7 |
“to attract young members and to see ways in order to be more productive and more collaborative. This is the general idea and then we have to find ways to focus on new [scientific] developments” – Stakeholder 3 |
“I think these colleagues are mostly chest physicians, pulmonologists, interested maybe in certain aspects of respiratory medicine but they only consume what’s new, so they come to the, in your congresses to obtain an update in their fields of interests. […] it’s a huge chance to communicate, to interact with your peers and to meet and congress to plan your new projects.”- Stakeholder 8 |
“it’s gaining a boost in your enthusiasm for your profession. I think an important role for the conferences is first getting enthusiastic again, hearing new things and meeting other people, that is very important aspect of conferences as well” – Stakeholder 2 |
Theme 2: Gaining knowledge was expected to be easier in virtual platforms. Description: The virtual format was expected to allow viewing of pre-recorded and live recorded sessions given the ease of switching to and from parallel sessions. Having all the scientific information on one platform makes it easier to share all content with the audience. |
“everything is recorded or even pre-recorded and then obviously you can go to all the parallel sessions if you want, because you can’t do that in the real congress”- Stakeholder 12 |
“sharing the scientific information will also be more possible now of course and an advantage of the digital format”- Stakeholder 5 |
Theme 3: Flexible and convenient access with broadened global participation through reduced travel were expected to be strong motivators for virtual formats. Description: The virtual format was expected to allow attendees to stream without travel cost and time burdens. Accessing virtual recordings makes it easier for attendees to accommodate their personal and work schedules. |
“it’s just like cherry picking, we’ve picked that talks and you don’t have to sit there for all session. You can do it at any time, whenever you want, so I think that’s a huge benefit” – Stakeholder 2 |
“in one way it’s good because you do not have to travel, you do not have to move, you can do it in a fractioned way, for example one evening and then another piece in another evening, maybe also when you have spare time.” – Stakeholder 5 |
Theme 4: Long hours in front of the screen were thought likely to decrease concentration, decrease interaction and create challenges balancing other daily commitments. Description: Virtual formats would mean spending hours of time in front of a screen, which can lead to decreased engagement and concentration. Physically being in a different location, city or travelling could mean that other day to day tasks such as work commitments or family commitments, if joining from home, do not interfere with the time dedicated to in-person conferences. For speakers, having the audience in-person was expected to change the ambience whereas speaking to a screen can be difficult. |
“Online you can lose some attention because of course you’re doing something else, usually, you’re also, you know, you have the kids or you have someone who’s coming in and so you can lose attention and then you do not see it in person who’s speaking” – Stakeholder 11 |
“I mean in big auditoria of course it’s a different thing, also the [virtual] interaction with the crowd is limited, maybe you have some multiple-choice questions or some votes or some polls, but especially in the abstracts it’s not the same as when you can really see your audience and that interaction I think will be missing, for sure.” – Stakeholder 6 |
Theme 5: Decreased interaction with other delegates was expected to have a detrimental impact on professional and personal development. Description: Using the example of poster discussions, live discussion with members gathered around a poster was thought to be very different relative to online interactions. The live atmosphere was expected to foster spontaneous meetings and discussions while allowing new young researchers to be introduced into the community. Personal development was also expected to decline by virtue of lessened connection with friends. |
“I’ll see how it goes with the posters, because I think the posters discussions that we have, around the posters and going around meeting people is all part of the networking and talking and introducing your new young researches to a broader group. I’m not sure how that’s going to work.” – Stakeholder 1 |
“if you don’t know people and you have to be quite careful and we’re not able to create this personal linkage, I think it’s very difficult to advance and the all thing it becomes so dry and uninteresting […] without having this personal attachment because, you know, when you live in the hospital, when your life is 98% medicine.” – Stakeholder 9 |