Questions

John McCormick
303-395-1782 X 75
info@globalcmeaward.com

Judging Information

The judges of the Global CME Impact Award include GAME members from medical societies, commercial entities, medical education companies and professional organizations. Judges will be chosen because of their professional and wide-ranging level of expertise. Any judge who has a potential conflict of interest, including, but not restricted to, working for an organization that submitted that program and/or being involved with any aspect of the project, will be recused from judging that entry. All judges will be required to sign a confidentiality agreement that prohibits them from disclosing information from entry submissions.

Global Education Group staff members are not eligible to be judges and therefore Global will have no control or influence over the judging or awards selection.

The Global CME Impact Award committee is seeking proposals that illustrate best-in-class CME/CE initiatives that have provided healthcare professionals with up-to-date, clinically relevant, scientifically rigorous medical information while promoting excellence in all aspects of medical care and coordination, patient safety, and the effective use of resources. Below are six (6) key criteria we’ll be looking for:

2018 Award Criteria:

  • Innovation: Explain how your program was innovative. What was novel in the design, development, delivery of your project/program. Please explain the unique approach you designed and /or deployed.
  • Adult teaching methodologies: Describe the adult learning and teaching methods used for your project/program, and illustrate the learner experience.
  • Collaborative: Did your project/program engage other stakeholders in the design and development? Did you use collaborative teaching methods? If so, summarize the collaborative model, roles of each organization, or methods used and why they were important to the project.
  • Patient Engagement: Did your project/program focus on maximizing patient engagement in shared decision-making, self-management, provider-patient communication, etc? If yes, describe the model and impact patient engagement had in your project/program.
  • Educational Impact: Summarize the educational impact your project/program had on the learners. Did your project affect organizational, team, provider knowledge, skills or behavior changes? What were the metrics, desired, outcomes, did you meet or exceed your program objectives?. Preference will be given to proposals that clearly outline an evidence-based approach to designing CME that is more likely to improve physician performance and patient health outcomes using Moore et al., CME Framework or other models that measure change in knowledge, skills, behavior and performance.
  • Sustainability: Tell us how your project/program is sustainable for the learner.

For a complete description and definition of the award criteria, please see the FAQ page: 

Scoring

After entries are submitted, the panel of judges will begin a thorough process that includes pre-scoring to select a top 10, subsequent deliberation and the ultimate decisions of the winner and honorable mentions. Points will be awarded in whole and half number increments only. Judges will use the following criteria for assessing and scoring the activity:

Criteria for Assessing the Program: 10 Points 

  • Was the program innovative, forward thinking, and engaging in nature? (2 Points)
  • Did the proposal demonstrate appropriate use of adult teaching methods? (2 Points)
  • Did the applicant collaborate with other partners or illustrate collaborative learning models? (2 Points)
  • Did the program include patient education or optimize patient engagement? (2 Points)
  • Are the activities sustainable for the audiences they were intended for? (2 Points)

Criteria for Assessing the Results of the Program: 20 Points

  • Are program outcomes presented? (5 Points)
  • Are the outcomes clearly demonstrated with appropriate learner data? (5 Points)
  • Is an outcomes analysis present? (5 Points)
  • How impactful is the outcomes analysis? (5 Points)

Criteria for Assessing the Program Impact: 20 Points

  • Evidence of Activity Impact: A clear description or demonstration of why this activity had the greatest impact and deserves recognition. Ultimately, the abstract should demonstrate how the activity made an impact on the healthcare industry, including but not limited to HCP performance, patient outcomes and community change for the better. Preference will be given to proposals that clearly outline an evidence-based approach to designing CME that is more likely to improve physician performance and patient health outcomes using Moore et al., CME Framework or other models that measure change in knowledge, skills, behavior and performance.

In the event of a tie, the score awarded for the “Evidence of Activity Impact” section will be used as a tie breaker.