|
BREAKOUT SESSIONS AND TOWN HALL MEETINGS
Breakout Sessions are intended for an IN-PERSON audience only
Town Hall Meetings are intended for IN-PERSON AND VIRTUAL audiences
Learn More and Register for the 2027 APCCMPD Annual Conference
Rapid Response: Early Identification and Intervention of the Struggling Fellow
Laura J. Hinkle, MD, MEd
Indiana University School of Medicine
Edward F. Kilb, III, MD
Medical University of South Carolina
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
In retrospect, a struggling pulmonary and critical care medicine fellow is often identifiable in the first few months of fellowship. However, program leadership and core faculty sometimes miss these early indicators. During this session, participants will learn strategies for early identification of the struggling fellow and targeted interventions to improve the fellow’s likelihood of overall success.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
At the conclusion of this session participants should be better able to:
1. Identify early signs of struggling PCCM fellows
2. Implement evidence based early interventions to support struggling fellows
3. Evaluate effectiveness of the interventions as evidenced by clinical performance
Back to Breakout Sessions
Beyond Mindfulness: Tangible, Systemic, and Structural Approaches to Program-Level Wellness
Bryan Sexton, PhD
Duke Center for the Advancement of Well-being Science
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
Session description will be added as information becomes available
SESSION OBJECTIVES
Session objectives will be added as information becomes available
Back to Breakout Sessions
See One, Do One, Teach One? Building Skills for Procedural Supervision in PCCM
Anna Neumeier, MD
University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine
Bibi Aneesah Jaumally, MD
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Darlene R. Nelson, MD, MHPE
Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
This session will provide fellows and early-career faculty with practical tools for supervising procedures while balancing patient safety, learner autonomy, and effective teaching. Using common PCCM procedures as examples, participants will discuss how to assess learner readiness, conduct a pre-procedure briefing, set expectations before a procedure, provide real-time coaching, intervene when needed, and deliver actionable feedback afterward.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
Session objectives will be added as information becomes available
Back to Breakout Sessions
Using Z-Scores to Improve Fairness in Graduate Medical Education Interview Scoring
Banks W. Kooken, MD
Brent A. Bagley, MD
Gabriel T. Bosslet, MD
Laura J. Hinkle, MD, MEd
Indiana University School of Medicine
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
Z-score standardization can serve as a practical statistical solution to the issue of interview rater variability that inevitably arises when candidates are reviewed by different subsets of faculty on interview day. A candidate’s interview outcome may depend on the faculty they encounter that day, as much as the candidate’s merit. Centering each interviewer’s scores around their own mean and scaling their standard deviation minimizes the impact of individual bias and scale use. At our institution, faculty members’ mean interview scores and standard deviations from the previous interview season were standardized using Z-scores, creating dramatic shifts in the program’s rank order list. Thirty-six applicants improved their rank order by, on average, 4 positions; while twenty-seven applicants worsened their rank order by an average of 6 positions. This interactive workshop will give participants and in-depth knowledge of not only the impact of Z-score standardization for interview day scores, but the skills they need to carry this tool back to their home institution for implementation. Following a brief review of Z-scores and their statistical implications, we will provide a fictional data set via an excel file with interviewer’s raw scores for a set of candidates. Using Excel, we will demonstrate the ease of quickly calculating the mean and standard deviation of these scores, and then the standardization of these with Z-scores.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
At the conclusion of this session participants should be better able to:
1. Describe Z-scores and the implementation of Z-score standardization to reduce inter-rater variability for GME applicants to ensure understanding of the concept.
2. Utilizing a fictional dataset; apply the use of Z scores to practice their implementation with guidance from the presenters.
3. Evaluate the use of Z scores for standardization and discuss alternative applications of the concept.
Back to Breakout Sessions
Signals in the Noise: What Two Recruitment Cycles Taught Us and What Comes Next
Shirine Allam, MD
Emory University School of Medicine
Sherie Gause, MD
Oregon Health & Science University
Stella B. Ogake, MD
The Ohio State University College of Medicine
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
Preference signaling has rapidly become a central component of fellowship recruitment, with high adoption among both applicants and programs and clear evidence that signals influence interview selection. However, variation in signal types (tiered vs. non-tiered), number of signals, cross-applicant behavior, and program interpretation has created new complexities. This interactive small-group session will bring together program directors to compare and contrast applicant behaviors and program outcomes from the first two recruitment cycles using signaling. Participants will reflect on how different signal structures (e.g., gold/silver vs. unified signals) and signal volumes influenced application patterns, interview yield, and perceived fairness. The session will emphasize real-world experiences, how programs actually used signals and how applicant strategies evolved. Through facilitated discussion and structured comparison, participants will identify shared challenges (e.g., signal dilution, cross-application inequities, interpretation of tiered signals) and develop consensus-driven recommendations to refine signaling design, optimize its value, and improve transparency for the next recruitment cycle.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
At the conclusion of this session participants should be better able to:
1. Compare recruitment outcomes and behaviors across two signaling cycles
2. Evaluate the impact of signal design (type and number) on decision-making
3. Generate actionable recommendations for the next recruitment cycle
Back to Breakout Sessions
From Bedside to Benchmarks: Maximizing Knowledge Sharing and Fostering Trainee Autonomy in Clinical Teaching
Jisoo Lee, MD
Brown University
Natalie Held, MD
University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine
Darlene R. Nelson, MD, MHPE
Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
Bedside teaching is a cornerstone of pulmonary and critical care education, yet balancing direct clinical instruction with the promotion of trainee self-directed learning remains a common challenge for faculty. This interactive small-group session explores the mechanics of how trainees absorb knowledge at the bedside and examines the pivotal role faculty play as facilitators rather than just information providers. Participants will discuss evidence-based strategies for structured bedside teaching, identify techniques to stimulate critical thinking in real-time, and share practices that encourage fellows to independently pursue clinical questions post-rounds.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
1. Analyze the cognitive and experiential ways pulmonary and critical care trainees acquire and retain clinical knowledge during bedside rounds.
2. Implement specific faculty questioning and facilitation techniques that actively encourage trainees to engage in self-directed learning and post-round inquiry.
3. Design a structured approach to a bedside teaching encounter that balances efficient knowledge sharing with trainee autonomy.
Back to Breakout Sessions
Community-Based Program Forum
Kathleen Doo, MD, MHPE
Kaiser Permanente Northern California
Ernest K. DiNino, MD
UMASS Chan Medical School-Baystate
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
This Town Hall meeting offers a dedicated space for leaders of community-based and community/university-affiliated programs to connect and collaborate. This is your chance to network with peers managing similar programs, share common challenges, and learn best practices for overcoming obstacles. Join us for a productive discussion and leave with valuable insights and connections to strengthen your program.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
At the conclusion of this session participants should be better able to:
1. Identify challenges unique to community-based programs and community/university-affiliated programs.
2. Share best practices for the administration of community-based programs and community/university-affiliated fellowship programs.
Back to Town Hall Meetings
Interventional Pulmonology Fellowship Program Forum
Van K. Holden, MD
University of Maryland School of Medicine
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
This Town Hall meeting offers a dedicated space for leaders of interventional pulmonology fellowship programs to connect and collaborate. This is your chance to network with peers managing similar programs, share common challenges, and learn best practices for overcoming obstacles and pursuing ACGME Accreditation. Join us for a productive discussion and leave with valuable insights and connections to strengthen your program.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
At the conclusion of this session participants should be better able to:
1. Identify challenges unique to interventional pulmonology programs.
2. Share best practices for the administration of interventional pulmonology fellowship programs.
Back to Town Hall Meetings
Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Program Forum
Julia A. Powelson, MD
Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
This Town Hall meeting offers a dedicated space for leaders of critical care medicine fellowship programs to connect and collaborate. This is your chance to network with peers managing similar programs, share common challenges, and learn best practices for overcoming obstacles. Join us for a productive discussion and leave with valuable insights and connections to strengthen your program.
SESSION OBJECTIVES
At the conclusion of this session participants should be better able to:
1. Identify challenges unique to critical care medicine programs.
2. Share best practices for the administration of critical care medicine fellowship programs. (unchanged on here SA form)
Back to Town Hall Meetings
Building Strong Subspecialty Programs
Grant Turner, MD
UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine
Lingye Chen, MD
Duke University School of Medicine
Van K. Holden, MD
University of Maryland School of Medicine
Kristina T. Kudelko, MD
Stanford University School of Medicine
|
SESSION DESCRIPTION
Session description will be added as information becomes available
SESSION OBJECTIVES
Session objectives will be added as information becomes available
Back to Town Hall Meetings
Back to top
|
