CME & Med-Ed Providers

An accredited provider or a clinician has to put their name on every course. A reviewer checks each claim against its reference, and the draft waits between documents, review portals and email while people chase each other.

Meanwhile learners have shifted to on-demand options. They take courses between meetings, on their phones, and expect to find the next one without hunting through a catalog.

And supporters want to know what learners did with a course afterward. Most providers can only report who finished, with little on what learners changed.

• Review that takes longer than the course. Each draft is checked against your standards and references before a reviewer sees it, then waits in a queue with a named reviewer and a due date. Our human-in-the-loop work keeps a named person approving every course and logs each approval for accreditation audits.
• A learning platform that strains. Courses, credits and learner records moved off fragile homegrown platforms onto ones that scale, so no learner loses a credit in the switch. That's our app design and development work.
• No clear way to report outcomes. We match who finished, who claimed credit and what they did next across registration, the learning platform and your CRM, in reports supporters and accreditors can trust. That's our data science work.
• Too little learner feedback. Short voice conversations after a course get hundreds of learners to respond at once, so the next course answers what they asked for. That's our discovery work.

Dermsquared runs dermatology conferences and education. Alongside its new app, we moved its courses from a learning platform built in-house to Docebo, with the learners and their credits carried across. Learning now runs on the web and in the app between meetings. The Dermsquared case study covers the rest.

If you also run a member society and its meetings, our page for medical societies covers the meeting app.