|
MORE DETAILS
|
Home
About us
Testimonials
Events
Useful Reading
Companies
Independents
Services
Special offers
Job Adverts
Twittering
Webcasts
Starting out
|
|
|
ATTENDEES
Adrian Brown
Alan Morris
Alice Moore
Amanda Halliday
Amy Hargreaves
Ben Thomas
Bev Hicks
Bill Wolvey
Cate Scott
Christopher Pym
Claire Lea
Claire Scarborough
Elaine Ferguson
Emma Kenny
Fiona Matheson
Gill Sperrin
Gwen Napolitano
Jessica Beishon
Kate Carpenter
Laila Lynch
Laura McGovern
Liz Baker
Liz McNeil Grist
Liz Reader
Louise Richards
Marion Barnett
Mary Berrington
Matthew Konneh
Max Brady
Nicole CollingwooD
Paul Tregouet
Peter Llewellyn
Roseanne Wilkinson
Siobhan Burn
Stewart Jones
Sue Neville
Susan Macdonald
|
|
|
This informal initiative, led by Peter Llewellyn of NetworkPharma, encourages networking and dialogue amongst individuals working in and around specialist medical education, medical communications and medical publishing businesses primarily based in the UK.
Please help spread the word and sign up for our weekly newsletter by emailing Peter Llewellyn.
|
|
|
Join the MedComms Forum LinkedIn Group.
The Group is open to all and intended to serve as a catalyst for wider debate and dialogue about the legitimate role of medical communications and the role of the global pharmaceutical industry in delivering optimal healthcare management to all patients.
|
|
|
Related Sites
|
|
EVENING BRIEFING - 19TH MARCH 2008 - UXBRIDGE
|
Eugene Pozniak of Siyemi Learning, explained how in the absence of a single, overarching regulatory body for CME activity across the region, individual countries are at varying stages of implementation. As such, the accreditation process throughout the continent is a splintered affair, governed by four different types of regulatory authority: National Accreditation Authorities, the European Accreditation Council for CME, European Specialty Accreditation Boards and Accredited Providers.
The attitude to CME differs from country to country. Across Europe, each individual autonomous healthcare system has different requirements and expectations of its doctors. In some countries, CME is mandatory, while in others, it is voluntary. In some, it is neither understood nor recognised. However, even in areas where CME is a legal obligation, enforcing compliance remains a challenge. Incentives and punitive measures, some seemingly Draconian, have been introduced to encourage and enforce uptake, but so far a successful method to police the system has yet to emerge.
Despite such a confusing environment, CME-accredited education is regarded as being important.
The axiom that CME is ‘education for doctors, written by doctors, presented by doctors’ dictates that there should be no direct industry involvement in specific CME programmes. However, the corporate goodwill derived from being associated with high-quality educational activity, and the benefits of increased therapeutic awareness within the prescribing community, make CME a vital consideration for industry. Whilst it is clear that companies cannot stipulate, manipulate or influence CME content, it is equally clear that companies who fail to support it may somehow be relinquishing an opportunity for competitive advantage.
Eugene has set up some learning modules on his web site which will provide further useful insights into this important topic.
To make sure you're included in announcements about future events just email Peter Llewellyn, if you haven't already done so, to register your interest.
|
|
|
