· web view2013-12-17 · healthcare science annual conference 2013. 16.12.2013 12:13....

Healthcare Science Annual Conference 2013 16.12.2013 12:13

Healthcare Science Annual Conference 2013

1. Did we achieve this?

Aims and Objectives Our 2013 Healthcare Science Annual event aimed to update colleagues on a new Scottish Government Delivery Plan for the HCS workforce, and also the launch of the 20:20 Workforce Vision. We also aimed to engage with colleagues on approaches to service improvement and the developments in Scotland regarding practitioner and postgraduate training.

Name1 Yes2 Partially3 No

Name PercentYes 56.3%Partially 39.6%No 4.2%N 48

2. If no, what could we have done differently?

wasnt much of an update on the delivery plan, its "in progress". the 2020 vision keynote was more of a personal take on life than what will the 2020 vision mean for staff or can be used by organisations and managers. Service improvement was limited to "we must think about doing thiings differently". We know that. and to be fair thats already what we have preached to our teams on a day to day basis. The workshop was interesting to see the highland quality re-hash the obvious from the US and to teach us about lean, which believe it or not modern laboratories have been proficient in for at least 20 year since we work in a production environment

All those negative's aside - i would have preferred a more practical approach to the day with some backed-up examples from the likes of the english system, some real examples of workforce planning in action and less of a party political broadcast for healthcare science leaders who have no real effect in day to day operations in scotland

56.3%

39.6%

4.2%

1 2 30%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


Too many speakers all just said the same thing. It would have been more useful to have a greater variety of speakers from different perspectives instead of several people all giving a virtually identical talk.I believe the talks were very engaging, inspirational and motivational. I learned to think differently as a Healthcare Scientist and appreciate the wider role I have to play. The actual finer details of the delivery plan were unclear to me but as a junior HCS this may be the reason why.

RF More info regards Delivery Plan

a more interactive, possibly longer workshop, it felt as if we were asked questions but were not able to discuss the answers fully or to interact with those running the workshop.The 2020 workforce vision talk was well delivered, but some confusion over continual use of 20:20 acronym which is incorrect (should be 2020, as in the year.

State the delivery plan.

The delivery plan thats already 2 years late- I would have hoped it would be launched at this conference.

Not sure in fairness what "new" items there were to be raised and shared at this event on the subject of workforce and 20:20 that we hadn't already heard about. Useful to have it consolidated to some degre through and by the lead for HCS too.

lots of information on 20:20 workforce vision which i had previously never heard of

The was little about the Delivery Plan which has been expected for over a year now and still no firm word of publication


3. What did you hope to achieve from attending the event? (e.g. learning abut a new policy/strategy/framework, networking with colleagues from different Board/Sectors etc.)

i hoped for some real detail on delivery plan, but didnt get any. was looking for real examples of service improvement but didnt really seen any. Unfortunately this gathering seems to have run out of strategic steam

Gained more information regarding the common core list which is really useful. Also enjoyed hearing about audiology and 20.20 vision.

Overview of NHS Scotland's vision for addressing the challenges of the 2020 vision and alignment of HCS aims in light of this

Learning about the intended future of HCS within the NHS. Learning more about MSC implementation. Networking.

I wanted to gain more information regarding Route 2/Equivalence entry to Clinical scientist training.

To gain more insight into the HCS framework and a better understanding of the government initiatives behind training and service delivery

To be more informed about service improvements in other Boards, often in other HCS areas. Networking with colleagues from different Boards/disciplines.

update on technologist training and registration.

Learn about the new delivery plan.

Getting direction for the profession - through the delivery plan and hearing from the professional leads.

Netwroking with colleagues was a big part but also keeping up to date with latest policy / strategy

RF Updates and above all networking.

networking with colleagues, keep up to date with training planning.

Networking with colleagues and leaning about the wider healthcare science workforce.

networkingguidance on how the new framework and its implementation

Share scientific work via poster, network with scientists across disciplines, keep abreast of the vision for healthcare science.

As Audiology volunteer it was interesting to hear different policy's and strategy framework's of other Professionals attending on the day.

It was interesting to hear about the Grampian experience and thier news ways of working but I think it would be hard to get the buyin from senior managers to replicate this, particularly as they are not even sure who we are.

I think the question re how HCS staff engage managers and planners at a senior level was not really answered by Alan, although he may be able to identify some staff groups in HCS now.Learning about a new stategyNetworking

Learning more about the implementation of the training schemes within Scotland and the policies governing them.

Workforce 2020 was of interest and networking

I was hoping to increase my enthusiam for the board leads and the HCS structure in general.Also while netwroking, get a sense that the current employed board leads are having an impact.

I was hopeful that the delivery plan would be available

To get a greater sense of being part of a larger Healthcare Science group and to learn more about other specialities.

A bit of networking and "reassurance"!

networking and seeing where helacare science needs to go to develop

To get a better understanding if the CCL and how best to focus my training around this.


Hoped to see how other NHS areas were dealing with the pressures put uopn us.

Hoped to find out more information on msc for clinical physiologists.

learning about workforce vision

Would have been good to hear the timetable for the launch of the delivery plan - was expecting it at the Annual Event.

Networking

Better understanding of stragity related to Health Sciences.

To get the broader picture of Healthcare Science in Scotland.

To get a sense of the future of Healthcare Science and to network with colleagues.

more on national delivery plan

learn how other areas within HCS work

Learn more about where healthcare science training was going in Scotland.

To gain up to date knowledge of what is going on in the NHS and to network with NHS colleagues.

Learning about any changes to Training for HCSW, update on Modernising Scientific Careers/The Academy of HCS, Registration

4. Were your objectives met?

Name1 Yes2 Partially3 No

Name PercentYes 41.7%Partially 50.0%No 8.3%N 48

41.7%

50.0%

8.3%

1 2 30%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


5. If not, please explain why this is the case and what might have made a difference.

although it was nice to meet up with folks and find out they were in the same boat, theres not much you can really do. We would be better having a barbecue in the summer in a more accessible location since the content of the conference was beat hands down by the networking opportunity. Maybe the next one, if it happens should be a couple of keynotes of practical value in the morning and an afternoon of top gossip and networking.Since some of the documents haven't been published yet, there wasn't much in the way of concrete information on the future. I didn't really get a proper idea of how the MSC early implementers have done it and what it all may mean for the rest of us given that we can't fully implement "true" MSC without the software. There wasn't any encouragement when it came to networking - because I didn't know anyone else, I was left standing around on my own as others chatted to folk they already know and essentially ignored me.It maybe would have been more helpful if there had been an additional workshop/meeting to address Route 2 /Equivalence as there is a lack of overall information to help people move forward who are not in the traditional Genetics set up.

A general talk on governmental policies and procedures and how these are interlinked with each other might be useful

would like to have had more info on equivalence related to physiology services. details of CCL is rather pointles without it.

The shortened lunch, due to over running of sessions, limited the opportunity for networking and poster observation.

More information on delivery plan.

As above

New stategy was not new.

Unfortunately this is still being implemented and therefore it is too early to achieve my objective fully but there was no issues with the information received on the day.I feel while the David Stirlings post is vacant, there is a distinct lack of direction of where the national and board leads should be heading. No delivery plan and no joined up thinking is a big disappointment. everyone seems to be doing there own thing where some sharing and joined up approach would be better in these circumstances.

More depth on the CCL and what is expected when applying for funding using the CCL template

Still awaiting further information on msc for clinical physiologists. Felt that the structure of the day was very split - lots of information for biomedical scientists on future of msc but still no answers for clinical physiologists.

Still no paper to hold, would have been good to have the consultation launched on this date

We do not appear to have moved on any from this time last year.


6. How would you rate the speakers? Please give a brief explanation of your choice

Series name1 Welcome and Reflection: Kim Heathcote2 Chief Health Professions Officer Address - Our Strategic Priorities: Jacqui Lunday Johnston

3Improvement and Effectiveness: Hear to Help. A Volunteer's Tale in our Audiology Service: Irene Fyfe with Muffin the hearing dog and Paul Doody

4 Taking Stock of Diagnostics in our Life Science Services: Derek Bishop5 Developing the Profile and Contribution of our Clinical Physiologists: Stephanie Doody6 Challenges and Opportunities in our Physical Science Services: David Gow7 Working with the HCS Modernisation - an Update: David Baty8 20:20 Workforce: Alan Boyter

Question Average NWelcome and Reflection: Kim Heathcote 2.23 48Chief Health Professions Officer Address - Our Strategic Priorities: Jacqui Lunday Johnston 2.33 48Improvement and Effectiveness: Hear to Help. A Volunteer's Tale in our Audiology Service: Irene Fyfe with Muffin the hearing dog and Paul Doody

1.75 48

Taking Stock of Diagnostics in our Life Science Services: Derek Bishop 2.25 48Developing the Profile and Contribution of our Clinical Physiologists: Stephanie Doody 2.27 48Challenges and Opportunities in our Physical Science Services: David Gow 2.27 48Working with the HCS Modernisation - an Update: David Baty 2.51 4720:20 Workforce: Alan Boyter 1.79 48

2.23

2.33

1.75

2.25

2.27

2.27

2.51

1.79

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

3.002.502.001.501.000.500.00

Average


7. Welcome and Reflection: Kim Heathcote

Name1 Excellent2 Very Good3 Good4 Average5 Poor6 Very Poor

Name PercentExcellent 18.8%Very Good 47.9%Good 25.0%Average 8.3%Poor 0.0%Very Poor 0.0%N 48

18.8%

47.9%

25.0%

8.3%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


8. Chief Health Professions Officer Address - Our Strategic Priorities: Jacqui Lunday Johnston



18.8%

45.8%

22.9%

8.3%

4.2%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


9. Improvement and Effectiveness: Hear to Help. A Volunteer's Tale in our Audiology Service: Irene Fyfe with Muffin the hearing dog and Paul Doody



52.1%

27.1%

14.6%

6.3%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


10. Taking Stock of Diagnostics in our Life Science Services: Derek Bishop



22.9%

43.8%

18.8%

14.6%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


11. Developing the Profile and Contribution of our Clinical Physiologists: Stephanie Doody



29.2%

31.3%

25.0%

12.5%

2.1%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


12. Challenges and Opportunities in our Physical Science Services: David Gow



18.8%

45.8%

25.0%

10.4%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


13. Working with the HCS Modernisation - an Update: David Baty



17.0%

36.2%

31.9%

10.6%

2.1%

2.1%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


14. 20:20 Workforce: Alan Boyter



50.0%

29.2%

14.6%

4.2%

2.1%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


15. Comments:

Would like to have heard more from Alan Boyter

An excellent and very interesting presentation from Alan Boyter. You should accept his invitation to come back again.Enjoyed the presentation with Irene and Paul, very interesting to hear her story and the impact that she has within the audiology department.Muffin's and Irene's story didn't seem to be relevant.David Baty's talk, I felt, required an understanding of MCS to get anything out of it.Derek Bishop's talk , don;t think I took anything from this.

Poor audio didnt help the experience.

A speaker focused on clinical science training or a trainee giving helpful insights should be mandatory at this event

A 10 minute talk from the winner of the poster comp would also be very worthwhile

All speakers were good but Alan Boyter was a very honest and refreshing view of NHS Scotland.

Would have been good to have visual aids (Jacqui Lunday Johnson). Always enjoyable and useful to hear from different perspectives (Irene Fyfe).

Nothing new

16. How would you rate the workshops? Please give a brief explanation of your choice

Series name1 Workshop 1: The NES Common Core List - Postgraduate Scientist Support 2014: Robert Farley2 Workshop 2: Service Improvement - Fostering a New Culture - the NHS Highland Experience: Linda Kirkland and Anne Gent3 Workshop 3: Leading an Improvement Cycle - using critical friends: Joanne McDonald and Jennifer Thwaites

23.8%

18.8%

7.1%

23.8%

31.3%

21.4%

33.3%

25.0%

35.7%

19.0%

12.5%

35.7%

0.0%

12.5%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Average

Poor

Very Poor


ExcellentVery Good

Good Average PoorVery Poor

N

Workshop 1: The NES Common Core List - Postgraduate Scientist Support 2014: Robert Farley

23.8% 23.8% 33.3% 19.0% 0.0% 0.0% 21

Workshop 2: Service Improvement - Fostering a New Culture - the NHS Highland Experience: Linda Kirkland and Anne Gent

18.8% 31.3% 25.0% 12.5% 12.5% 0.0% 16

Workshop 3: Leading an Improvement Cycle - using critical friends: Joanne McDonald and Jennifer Thwaites

7.1% 21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 0.0% 0.0% 14

17. Workshop 1: The NES Common Core List - Postgraduate Scientist Support 2014: Robert Farley



23.8%

23.8%

33.3%

19.0%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


18. Workshop 2: Service Improvement - Fostering a New Culture - the NHS Highland Experience: Linda Kirkland and Anne Gent



18.8%

31.3%

25.0%

12.5%

12.5%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


19. Workshop 3: Leading an Improvement Cycle - using critical friends: Joanne McDonald and Jennifer Thwaites



20. Comments:

Not much help with more complex scenarios - only really wanted to talk about simple things but it's not always possible to compartmentalise things to being that simple.

as previously stated

needed more time than allocated

Very informative, only improvement would have been for the workshop to be longer.

The workshop would have benefitted from showing a worked example to start with and then getting tables to present some of their ideas for the benefit of others in the room

7.1%

21.4%

35.7%

35.7%

0.0%

0.0%

1

2

3

4

5

6

100%80%60%40%20%0%

Percent


Linda and Anne were good presenters, enthusiastic. But I felt this workshop highlighted the problem between clinical scientists and management structure. The impression I got that this process was rolled out without involving the clinical scientists group in Highland, or with minimal involvement. The video about packing boxes into vans was not appropriate for the target audience.

Sorry I was not able to stay for workshops

I think we coud have done with more time.

Limited by time

Allowed people to put their views across with regards the stumbling blocks to postgraduate education and how these could be addressed.

I felt the CCL workshop should have been more focused on training and funding ( rather than focusing on how to track those that have been unsuccessful) An end note on how to apply successful and what is important in the funding application would have been more helpful to trainees and supervisors.Workshop was very split. Hoped to find out more about future of msc for clinical physiologists but this was not achieved. Questions that were addressed were tailored towards biomedical scientists. Did not achieve what I hoped from workshop and instead felt discussion was more venting frustration than anything else.

Too much time taken up by old U-Tube presentations.

The group I was in had good key points to feedback to NES. Interesting to find out what trainees from different areas think about their traing.

short on time however

All strands had similar issues

The workshop was more about the delegates providing information to help NES with aspects of the Common Core list. This in itself is valuable but I did not feel this provided me with more information or understanding regarding the CCL.

21. Was there enough time allowed for discussion at the event?

Name1 Yes2 No

59.6%

40.4%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


Name PercentYes 59.6%No 40.4%N 47

22. Was there enough time allowed for networking with other delegates during the event?

Name1 Yes2 No


87.2%

12.8%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


23. Should we move the timing of our annual event to late June?

Name1 Yes2 No


24. Do you prefer a Monday or a Friday for the event?

Name1 Monday2 Friday

55.6%

44.4%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent

35.4%

64.6%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


Name PercentMonday 35.4%Friday 64.6%N 48


25. What would you like to see in the event next year?

Practical healthcare science issues closer to the workforce and workplace. no more high level strategy unless a brief overview, its running close to the end in its current format

A greater variety of speakers. More chance to ask questions in the group context as we seemed to be running too late from the beginning.

For those not famililar with all the government policies regarding HCS it might be useful to have an update talk or workshop?

Speaker from outwith Healthcare Science (possibly AHP) to share experiences (e.g. AHP National Delivery Plan)

Program in time for visiting stands / viewing posters - eg earlier longer lunchVC / webex broadcasting to those not able to make the meetingDelivery PlanSomething about an HCS specialty in focus

an afternoon discussion? or debate? more interactive workshops

More time for questions. The HCS forum AGM (disappointed was cancelled).Combine this event with the HCS Postgraduate Trainee event (2 day event)? Different location - parking is not sufficient at the Beardmore and as it is out with the centre of Glasgow it makes a long journey. Somewhere near a main train station would be easier for the majority.implementationexamples of changing departments and its impactmore input for NHS managers

A fair awards system, where the work of all clinical scientists and trainees is considered for recognition. I feal a nominations system is biased.

A closer venue please- Im sure many people were put off attending because of the venue.

New stategy

Information on the implementation of the STP programme within Scotland and the issues arrising from this.

ISO Standards - A Laboratory Experience

A central location like Perth, beardmore doesnt help travelling. This was reflected in the numbers, as i dont think it was to do with month of year.Trainees perspective of clinical science.Some focus on how funding is allocated/ how to best focus application.

Feedback from our service users would be interesting, to see how we can raise our profiles!

Hopefully more information on msc for those groups who are still in limbo. However emjoyed topics from other specialisms as good to see what is going in across the board on healthcare science. June a better time for travelling than November (ie weather conditions). Venue was good. Alternation between Glasgow and Edinburgh would be good. Perhaps Perth/Stirling too?

First attendance at HS conf. so not sure what has already been covered in other events

Edinburgh is nice but Glasgow is easier

More poster presentations.

Alan Boyter gave a very informative presentation, it would be a good idea to ask him back. Why not invite a motivational speaker to the next event, in these challenging times it is important that staff are well motivated.

Speaker on motivational skills.

more workshops for strand specific

More presentations from healthcare scientists - both research project, developments and experiences of training. Less politics and fewer senior figures unless they have definite developments in training or prospects to report.

I have been to events in the past that highlighted research and innovation within practice and I really enjoyed those events.


Some interactive sessions, sharing of experiences within own discipline. It is difficult getting away from the day to day work these days so don't get the chance to discuss meaningful issues with colleagues within the same discipline. Networking in the breaks is all well and good however there are often colleagues at these events you do not know. A chance to meet share ideas and issues in a more formal setting that is facillitated would be of benefit.

26. Did you use Social Media prior to or during the conference?

Name1 Yes2 No


20.8%

79.2%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


27. How useful did you find the materials issued on the day?

Name1 Very useful2 Quite useful3 Not very useful4 Not at all useful

Name PercentVery useful 27.7%Quite useful 59.6%Not very useful 12.8%Not at all useful 0.0%N 47

28. How can we improve materials provided on the day?

there were no slide presentation notes, some people tried to write vigorously at the beginning until they realised most of the speakers werent actually saying anything

No improvement, the material was functional.

No suggestions

It would have been nice to have the slides as notes on the presentations.

Materials supplied good

I feelt that the morning session lacked focus and would have been better spent highlighting innovation from the three Healthcare Science streams

27.7%

59.6%

12.8%

0.0%

1 2 3 40%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


29. How would you rate the overall service you received from the NES Events Team?



43.8%

33.3%

22.9%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1 2 3 4 5 60%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


30. Did we respond to your queries in a timely manner?

Name1 Yes2 No


31. How would you rate the registration process?

100.0%

0.0%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent

39.6%43.8%

14.6%

0.0% 0.0% 2.1%

1 2 3 4 5 60%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent




32. Comments:

the best thing was the organisation of the event and hats off to the events team, clear, concise, professional.

The application / nomination process for the awards was not clear. Maybe have a permenant page on the website with all the information of each award and how to nominate - with clear deadlines. It almost looked like you were scrabbling around for entries at the last minute. Having the entries and winners from previous years would highlight what standard was being looked for.

I had a very enjoyable time at the Event and thank you all for your kindness shown to a volunteer in NHS

I heard alot of my colleagues unsure of what to do with the links and the advertising on the NES website could be more striking. Alot of people missed the link amonst a very busy email, registration is easier for other events.

33. How would you rate the venue for the event?

46.8%

31.9%

17.0%

4.3%0.0% 0.0%

1 2 3 4 5 60%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent




34. Comments:

good lecture theatre, decent parking

Auditorium sound wasn't great with quite a bit of feedback at times depending on the speaker.

train station near to venue.

The venue is excellent its the location thats a real problem.

Audio within the seminar room was poor.

good links but not very convenient for east of the country

It makes sense to use our NHS facilities than line other organisation's pockets. Coming from Dumfries it makes no difference where we have to travel to.

Good venue. Lots of room in auditorium, good toilet facilities, good lunch.

First class conference facility


35. Was the venue location suitable?

Name1 Yes2 No


74.5%

25.5%

1 20%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent


36. If no please comment

rotten location tho. not becuase its glasgow, but public transport isnt that good out there if reliant on main rail networks. Drving was a nightmare to it

Venue was really good but would have prefered if it was based in Edinburgh.

Not too bad for me as I work in the West of Scotland but I can imagine it was a bit of a pain for others to get to.

Very hard to get to in rush hour through Glasgow and for those not from the local area. However, parking was not a problem.

Inconvenient to get there by public transport. Prefer venue location in Central Edinburgh for travel arrangements.

Difficult to get to in time for the start

The location is not particularly convenient for anyone as it is not central, and the car park always overflows. A venue near a major train station would be much easier.

a More central location would be better for travelling

Too far away. As I appreatiate not everybody is not from Glasgow or Edinburgh a more centralised venue like Stirling with good rail links would be more realistic to encourage more attendees.Clydebank isn't as central as would be preferable, I think northern colleagues have to go the extra mile(s) to attend and this puts alot of people off. Reflected in the numbers of delegates and where those delegates are from, where as previously there was a waiting list.

difficult location to get to

A little more out the way than i anticipated however I would know for next time!

Difficult to assess - felt like the out skirts of Glasgow

Location alright if you drive but difficult when relying on public transport

37. How would you rate the catering at the event?

33.3%

47.9%

16.7%

0.0% 2.1% 0.0%

1 2 3 4 5 60%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent




38. Any additional comments on the catering:

food was ok

Food was very nice and good variety.

Really good variety of food available, both hot and cold. However, as someone who doesn't drink tea or coffee, it would have been nice to have some cold soft drinks available at lunchtime other than just the water cooler (which a group of people kept blocking off!).

Excellent catering

Very good catering (a little too good)

39. Any additional comments on the event?

as is often said, criticism is easy to give. its harder to make a difference and change that. im not being critical of the desire to try to meet the national agenda, that was attempted. im critical that the national agenda is confused, territorial and badly organised, because whatever way you look at it the scottish government healthcare science team have no power and even with the greatest idea in the world, the idea without power will just come down to talking about it and scratching their heads. the overall strategy should be to create power and influence and make a real difference. you did ask for feedback.

First time at the conference and I will come back.

More time for questions and networking.

Lets get back to a more central location and not let money rule the future direction of Healthcare science. This was always a very popular event and it has the potentiall to drop like the academy engagements and that would not be good for scotland.

I enjoyed the event but some focus on the needs of trainees, and funding applications would be very warmly welcomed.

· web view2013-12-17 · healthcare science annual conference 2013. 16.12.2013 12:13....

Documents