A Novel Questionnaire to Assess the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Medical Professionals Regarding Participation in Scientific Programs

</strong> Though there is an increase in the number of scientific programs, the quality of these sessions is not always optimal.

</strong> Our objective was to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of medical fraternity with regard to participation in scientific programs.

</strong> A total of </strong>103 faculty members and postgraduates from all specialties of Sri Venkateshwaraa Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Puducherry, India, who attended at least one scientific program (conferences, workshops, symposiums, panel discussions, or CMEs) in the past one year, were included. This was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study conducted over a period of three months in 2019. The content validity index (CVI) was computed to ascertain the validity of the questionnaire. Principal component analysis (PCA) followed by the calculation of Cronbach’s alpha was conducted to ascertain the reliability of the questionnaire. The self-developed and validated questionnaire was distributed among respondents, and necessary filling out instructions were elaborated to them.

</strong> Out of 85 participants, 96.5% and 74% responded correctly to the definitions of workshop (n = 82) and conference (n = 63), respectively. The CVIs of individual questionnaire items were higher than 75%, and Cronbach’s alpha of the questionnaire was obtained as 0.60. The mean knowledge score was 3.14 ± 1.3, and demographic characteristics were not found to influence the knowledge score (p > 0.05). The ‘expertise of resource persons’ and ‘necessity of the topic’ were the major factors determining the tendency for participation in scientific programs, as agreed by 81.2% and 80% of the respondents, respectively (p</em> < 0.001). Out of 83% of the respondents who were satisfied with their participation in the last scientific program they attended, major reasons for satisfaction were ‘scientific content’ (63%) and ‘resource persons, speakers, or trainers’ (63%).

</strong> The results of this study can be insightful to organizing bodies for better understanding the prerequisites of conducting any scientific session.