A more encompassing meeting (every two years) joining the groups from bone conduction, inner ear and other related disciplines held in different simultaneous sessions might be an attractive alternative that the organizers of the other conferences may consider investigating.
The following are some points that were raised during the community discussion on how to improve the meeting in the future. I tried to attribute the comments to the people who made them, but couldn't always do so:
Suggestions for future meetings
A longer talk each morning (like the keynote) to give overviews for the day?
Better use of microphones during discussion periods.
More time available for discussion after each talk (Hüttenbrink).
More time available for posters, and possibly cut down on talks a bit to accomodate them (Ravicz).
Quick poster presentations in front of the full audience: 2 slides, 3 min. plus 2 min. for discussion, and people can read the posters ahead of time (Hüttenbrink).
NO quick poster presentations (preceding point), since there might be a lot of posters that not everyone is interested in hearing about. Also, time would be better spent if the moderators didn't introduce each session. (Rosowski)
Extend posters into the evening. (Stenfelt)
Coffee available in front of the posters. (Hüttenbrink)
Combine posters with the reception of the evening. (Ilgner)
Raise awareness of MEMRO in the UK. A review of the meeting is being written in ENT news.
Get more otosurgeons to attend. Try to spread awareness of the meeting by word of mouth.
Don't change the name of the meeting (Allen)
Don't make the meeting too big -- keep it small enough to remain familiar.
Length of the meeting? Hüttenbrink: no parallel sessions.
One person was concerned about the lack of time to finish presentations and the difficulties for non-native english speakers to speak fast enough to fit within strict time limits.
What issues to talk about at the next meeting?
A special session talking about difficulties and things that don't work: an explanation and analysis of what didn't work surgically and scientifically (along the lines of Gyo's talk about the Rion implantable hearing aid). (àWengen)
The tympanic membrane at high frequencies (Allen)
Evolutionary/Zoological perspectives of the middle ear.
The strength of MEMRO is that it brings together surgeons and scientists. (Rosowski)
On whether or not to include cochlear mechanics: It would be a stretch to include it (Rosowski); It would dilute it too much (Stenfelt); Keep cochlear mechanics meetings separate (Allen); Possibly include seminars about the cochlea or middle-ear/cochlea interface to get people up to speed.
On whether or not to include bone conduction: Stenfelt likes that it's included.
Defining the scope in terms of how the middle-ear interfaces with the inner ear, or the various ways of how sound gets to the inner ear (Rosowski is in favor of this).
Comments
Meeting Size & frequency
A more encompassing meeting (every two years) joining the groups from bone conduction, inner ear and other related disciplines held in different simultaneous sessions might be an attractive alternative that the organizers of the other conferences may consider investigating.
Notes from the community discussion
The following are some points that were raised during the community discussion on how to improve the meeting in the future. I tried to attribute the comments to the people who made them, but couldn't always do so:
Suggestions for future meetings- A longer talk each morning (like the keynote) to give overviews for the day?
- Better use of microphones during discussion periods.
- More time available for discussion after each talk (Hüttenbrink).
- More time available for posters, and possibly cut down on talks a bit to accomodate them (Ravicz).
- Quick poster presentations in front of the full audience: 2 slides, 3 min. plus 2 min. for discussion, and people can read the posters ahead of time (Hüttenbrink).
- NO quick poster presentations (preceding point), since there might be a lot of posters that not everyone is interested in hearing about. Also, time would be better spent if the moderators didn't introduce each session. (Rosowski)
- Extend posters into the evening. (Stenfelt)
- Coffee available in front of the posters. (Hüttenbrink)
- Combine posters with the reception of the evening. (Ilgner)
- Raise awareness of MEMRO in the UK. A review of the meeting is being written in ENT news.
- Get more otosurgeons to attend. Try to spread awareness of the meeting by word of mouth.
- Don't change the name of the meeting (Allen)
- Don't make the meeting too big -- keep it small enough to remain familiar.
- Length of the meeting? Hüttenbrink: no parallel sessions.
- One person was concerned about the lack of time to finish presentations and the difficulties for non-native english speakers to speak fast enough to fit within strict time limits.
- A special session talking about difficulties and things that don't work: an explanation and analysis of what didn't work surgically and scientifically (along the lines of Gyo's talk about the Rion implantable hearing aid). (àWengen)
- The tympanic membrane at high frequencies (Allen)
- Evolutionary/Zoological perspectives of the middle ear.
- The strength of MEMRO is that it brings together surgeons and scientists. (Rosowski)
- On whether or not to include cochlear mechanics: It would be a stretch to include it (Rosowski); It would dilute it too much (Stenfelt); Keep cochlear mechanics meetings separate (Allen); Possibly include seminars about the cochlea or middle-ear/cochlea interface to get people up to speed.
- On whether or not to include bone conduction: Stenfelt likes that it's included.
- Defining the scope in terms of how the middle-ear interfaces with the inner ear, or the various ways of how sound gets to the inner ear (Rosowski is in favor of this).
- Add a session on gerbil?
What issues to talk about at the next meeting?