P16.04.B THE ROLE OF CHAIRPERSONS IN QUALITY AND INCLUSIVITY OF SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSIONS: AN EANO SURVEY

Abstract BACKGROUND Scientific conferences are vital platforms for sharing research, fostering collaboration, and driving scientific progress. While formal presentations are central to these events, interactive elements, such as expert panels and audience Q&A sessions, play a critical role in refining ideas, promoting critical thinking, and integrating diverse perspectives. The quality of scientific exchange at conferences like those organized by the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) depends heavily on effective session leadership and meaningful audience engagement. However, the influence of chairperson behavior on both the tone and substance of conference discussions remains underexplored. This study aims to systematically assess how session chair behavior, particularly speaker introductions, affects the quality and inclusivity of scientific discussions at EANO conferences. MATERIAL AND METHODS This observational study was conducted during the EANO Meeting 2024 in Glasgow. Members of the Nurse and Allied Health Professionals, Disparity and Inclusion, and Youngsters Committees collected pre-specified data during scientific sessions. The survey comprised 15 questions on chairperson behavior and session dynamics. Descriptive and correlational analysis was performed using R version 4.4.2. RESULTS We collected 231 complete survey responses, covering 149 distinct presentations. To ensure data accuracy and minimize potential bias from multiple responses per presentation, only the first entry for each presentation was retained (n = 149) from a total of 37 sessions. Most frequently the chairpersons were two females (71 cases, 47.7%) or one female and one male (54 cases, 36.2%), and usually the chairperson introducing the speaker was a female (101 cases, 67.8%). The speaker was introduced formally, with the academic title in most of the cases (67.1%). Female chairpersons more often introduced the speakers by their academic title, compared to male chairpersons (76.2% vs 52.3%, p< 0.0001). Invited speakers were more likely to be introduced by their academic title compared to abstract speakers (80.2% vs. 42.2%, p < 0.0001). Most respondents (98, 65.8%) strongly agreed or agreed that the scientific discussion was productive. Regarding the chairperson’s role, 137 respondents (91.9%) perceived the chairperson’s influence on the discussion as positive or neutral. CONCLUSION This study highlights the significant role of session chairpersons in shaping the quality and inclusivity of scientific discussions. By addressing unconscious biases and promoting equitable interactions, the aim is to enhance the overall experience and ensure meaningful contributions from all conference participants.