SessionBoard CE Accreditation Workflow

VIDEO TRANSCRIPT | Recorded: 2024-06-19 | Verify against current system state

Abstract¶

Question to SessionBoard vendor about how to implement the CE accreditation review process that occurs after a session has been approved for the conference. This involves third-party nurse practitioner reviewers evaluating educational objectives, pharmacology content, and presentation files, with back-and-forth communication with speakers for corrections before final CE approval.

Key Procedures¶

• Session approved for conference → accreditation review begins
• Assign review tasks in backend system
• NP reviewer evaluates educational objectives vs presentation content
• Check pharmacology inclusion requirements
• Review presentation files for compliance (e.g., no brand names)
• Communicate corrections needed to speaker
• Speaker makes updates and resubmits
• Approve accreditation for CE hours

Notable Statements¶

• 0:00:14 "I do have a specific question about a process that we currently do, that I didn't see how this would fit into SessionBoard"
• 0:00:27 "A person has been approved, their session has been approved. We have assigned tasks to them in our system"
• 0:01:05 "These specific sections have to be reviewed by either a nurse practitioner that's on staff with AANP, or with nurse practitioners that are members, that are on a committee"
• 0:01:23 "They will come in and review these sessions and make sure that the material provided in the PowerPoint slides and in the educational objectives match up"
• 0:01:29 "And that they are appropriate for nurse practitioners"
• 0:01:35 "We then approve the CE hours that someone can receive by taking this course"
• 0:02:02 "These reviews are taking place after the session has been approved for the conference" [KEY REQUIREMENT]
• 0:02:14 "Allow third parties to come in and help us with the review process"
• 0:03:03 "You had some information about Bear Aspirin on the first page. You've got to remove that before we can approve this PowerPoint slide" (example feedback)
• 0:03:24 "I do see that you can put comments on files, but I just want to make sure that that's a process that can be handled"

Systems & Configurations¶

Systems Mentioned¶

• SessionBoard (being evaluated)
• Current backend system (existing solution)

Accreditation Review Sections¶

Reviewer Types¶

Credentials/Access Mentioned¶

• Third-party reviewer access needed

Vendor Contacts Mentioned¶

• SessionBoard (recipient of question)

Errors & Troubleshooting¶

No errors - this is a vendor inquiry recording.

Transcript Gaps & Quality Notes¶

• Vendor question recording (4 minutes)
• Shows current backend system screens
• Key requirement: Post-approval workflow
• Comment system mentioned but needs confirmation
• Awaiting vendor response