Results from BCMA annual report survey

Issue: BCMJ, vol. 49, No. 9, November 2007, Page 505 News

Data from faxed and online responses to a survey on the BCMA Annual Report 2006/2007 show a high level of member satisfaction with the report. The survey collected a total of 144 responses to a series of multiple-choice and open-ended questions on the format and overall quality of the information provided to BCMA members in the report.

Overall interest in the report was high, with just over a quarter of respondents (26%) indicating they’d read 80% or more of the publication. Only 2% of respondents replied that they had not read the report at all, with the majority of those citing “lack of time” as a reason. When rating the report in comparison with the previous year’s publication, 70% of respondents rated the 2006 report as “good” or “excellent.”

The visual appeal of the report was acknowledged by respondents, with 70% rating the appearance of the publication as “good” or “excellent.” More than two-thirds (68%) of respondents felt that the report contributed to their level of confidence in the management and accountability of the association to a fair (47.2%) or great (21.1%) degree.
Slightly fewer respondents (63%) said they felt well informed regarding the association’s activities to a fair or great degree after reading the reports, with 28.3% stating they felt somewhat well informed, and 8.3% feeling not at all or poorly informed.

Regarding the length of the report, a strong majority (68%) felt that it was “just right,” with 25% of respondents indicating that the report was too long, and a few (6%) stating it was too short.

When asked to rate their level of interest in various areas of the report, respondents gave the highest ratings to Key Priorities for 06/07, the President’s report, Flashpoints and Milestones 06/07, and Key Priorities for 07/08. Other areas of interest included the Board of Directors report, the CEO’s report, the 2006 Financial Statements, BCMA Governance, and BCMA Committees. 

Survey respondents were asked two open-ended questions at the end of the survey. When asked what they liked about the report, many cited the clear design and layout as contributing to readability, and some commented that the report was concise and to the point. Others praised the report’s theme of collaboration between the BCMA and the Ministry of Health, with some singling out the GPSC and PITO information provided as being of interest. Many found the report well organized and easier to read than in previous years. 

Finally, readers were asked to provide input on what they would like to see changed next year. While the majority of respondents commented that they would leave the report as is, some suggestions for change included publishing the report in a less costly format (or online with the option for readers to download it as a PDF), re-incorporating the reports of the individual committees, and, on the other hand, making it shorter. Other suggestions were made regarding future themes for the report, such as focusing on the results of the Conversation on Health, or outlining joint projects with the CMA and other CMA affiliates.

Thanks to all survey respondents for their feedback and suggestions; once again we will use your input to improve the next report. Congratulations to this year’s survey draw winner, Dr Annette Lam, who won a 2-night stay at any Coast Hotel for participating in the survey. 

. Results from BCMA annual report survey. BCMJ, Vol. 49, No. 9, November, 2007, Page(s) 505 - News.

Above is the information needed to cite this article in your paper or presentation. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends the following citation style, which is the now nearly universally accepted citation style for scientific papers:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:284-7.

About the ICMJE and citation styles

The ICMJE is small group of editors of general medical journals who first met informally in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1978 to establish guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals. The group became known as the Vancouver Group. Its requirements for manuscripts, including formats for bibliographic references developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), were first published in 1979. The Vancouver Group expanded and evolved into the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which meets annually. The ICMJE created the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals to help authors and editors create and distribute accurate, clear, easily accessible reports of biomedical studies.

An alternate version of ICMJE style is to additionally list the month an issue number, but since most journals use continuous pagination, the shorter form provides sufficient information to locate the reference. The NLM now lists all authors.

BCMJ standard citation style is a slight modification of the ICMJE/NLM style, as follows:

  • Only the first three authors are listed, followed by "et al."
  • There is no period after the journal name.
  • Page numbers are not abbreviated.

For more information on the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, visit

BCMJ Guidelines for Authors

Leave a Reply