excellent focused talk. The font on the slides was frequently so small that it was illegible on the screen or the printed book
A good review
none
I liked how she approached it all
This lecture seemed to be A general review of Nb and Wilms’ rather than a board review. The material should be condensed to focus on testable material,
Great job with neuroblastic Tumors; felt like it was much better organized and comprehensive than the renal tumors section
wilms parts was not boards focused
Some of the organization of the talk could have been better. Would have appreciated more focus on what is likely to be asked on the boards, felt a little less focused on know this for the boards and more general information on the topic - which is good for practice but not so much for taking the test (unfortunately).
Excellent as always. thank you Julie!!
Dr. Park is a fantastic presenter. Learned so much from her presentation. She needs to give this lecture every 2 years!
One of the best presenters at the conference! Amazing review of many complex topics. Definitely invite back!!!
Love to see how Dr Park has change this lecture over the las three sessions to make a bit more board oriented rather than topic review
Excellent!
renal tumors were jumbled. Would have preferred if each renal tumor was discussed from start to finish and then moved on to the next one.
Neuroblastoma section was better organized than the Renal Tumor section--in trying to keep to format, constant jumping back and forth between different renal diseases with each subsection was disjointed, and a lot of the predispositions/mutations, etc were not fully explained or related to one another, appeared in different slides, etc. Would be better to tell a cohesive story for each, and then discuss staging/workup +/- treatment together as appropriate. Also much data was presented for completeness but not likely necessary for boards (as stated throughout the lecture) so reconsideration of content or how presented to help focus presentation would be worthwhile. Finally, key tables highlighting the distinguishing features of similarly presenting diseases for purposes of working through questions would be appreciate for all lectures, including this one.
Good, high-yield, overview of the topic that was easy to remain engaged with. Slides easy to follow and return back to at a later date.
Board content overshadowed by nuances of current treatments/clinical trials.
Best speaker ever.
Would recommend looking at each renal tumor independently with all histology/staging/treatment discussed at once for each disease rather then clumped together under each section. Helps when going back through to review.
Pretty good, really appreciated how she kept it board-focused and concise, and the flow charts at the end (from her fellow) were really nice. I had a hard time paying attention, not sure if that was her or me. Maybe including a few clinical vignettes or practice board questions would have helped, as this is an area that I can read about, or even see patients, but when faced with a question on a multiple choice test, I get easily confused
Would have preferred grouping information about diseases together instead of jumping back and forth between subtypes
While there is a lot of interesting new neuroblastoma data, the presentation contained too much information that is likely too modern for the current test. The specific studies do not seem as important for the exam.
Had to go through these slides on my own a couple times to understand the flow
Tons of detail, and she tried to emphasize important points. I appreciate having all this information as well for clinical review.
Effective speaker, good content, well organized. It was also nice to hear from a giant in the field who also happens to be a woman.
Spent most of time reading slides, did not add many pearls to what was written
The lecture was bit too long for the time and would recommend condensing the material so it was not so rushed.
It was difficult to follow once we got to the Wilms and Renal tumor section. Also this section is very long and in some areas slides repeat information. It may have been better to keep the renal tumor types together rather than organizing by Universal Tasks, maybe do this within the tumor subsection.
Provided all the information but with little emphasis as to key points, syllabus without highlights except for 4 bolded points