1. The question you asked after the panel discussion (10 marks) 

I think you did a great job presenting such an important and relevant issue and linking it to the TRFO clinic made it feel grounded in what’s already happening in the Kamloops community. I was wondering, what do you think might be the biggest barrier to actually getting an NP-led clinic up and running whether that be staffing, funding, or physician buy in and how could those challenges be addressed early on?

2. How did you feel it was answered by (10 marks) 

Megan answered the question thoughtfully, identifying physician buy-in as the biggest challenge in establishing an NP-led clinic. She explained that while funding and staffing are important, gaining support and collaboration from physicians remains the key barrier to implementation.She emphasized that once physician engagement is achieved, other elements like funding and logistics would likely follow, reflecting her understanding of healthcare hierarchy and influence. Megan also highlighted how fostering trust and collaboration between physicians and NPs could shift perceptions of NP roles and strengthen team-based care. Her answer showed strong awareness of real-world barriers, the current strain on physicians, and the importance of relationship-building and advocacy in healthcare transformation.

3. What went well? (5 marks) 

I really appreciated the format of the presentation it was hosted as if it were a podcast, which made it conversational, and easy to follow. The dialogue between presenters felt natural which created a sense of genuine discussion rather than a traditional lecture. Her presentation was well-rounded, drew on the diverse experiences and was well thought out. I thought the wicked problem was highly relevant and well chosen, it addressed a current and pressing gap in access to prenatal care in Kamloops which serves a wide area of British Columbia mothers. The presentation was well thought out, articulated clearly, and grounded in both evidence and community context. It felt realistic and feasible, connecting the NP-led model to what is already working locally such as the TRFO clinic. The groups ability to blend professional insight with local relevance made the topic feel timely and actionable. Her diverse experiences added depth, and the overall flow demonstrated strong preparation and understanding of the issue.

– engaging and unique, enjoyable to listen to
– dialogue in Megans section with other presenters felt natural creating an authentic discussion
– topic addressed a highly relevant and pressing issue
– clearly articulated
– linked professional and local perspectives

4. What can be done better? Identify 2 or more areas of improvements (10 marks)

At times, the pace of speech was quite fast which made it challenging to catch every point being made, especially during parts discussing implementation or policy details. Some slides were visually dense making it difficult to follow the conversation while reading the text. A slightly slower pace and simplified slides would help the audience stay focused on the dialogue without feeling rushed or overwhelmed. In terms of context, it could have been beneficial to expand further on how the NP-assisted clinic could be sustained over time, particularly how relationships with physicians might be strengthened or formalized to support ongoing collaboration. This would have added even more depth to an already strong and well-supported solution.

5. What can be done to improve? (Provide 3 or more suggestions for improvement). (15 marks) 

Several small adjustments could have made the presentation even stronger. The speech could have been delivered at a slightly slower pace allowing the audience more time to absorb key ideas and transitions. Second, the slides could have been simplified by reducing text and highlighting only the main discussion points to make the conversation easier to follow, it would help to break up the slides into smaller section allowing for smoother pacing and clearer focus one each topic. Third, from a content perspective the presentation could have gone a little deeper into how the NP-led clinic could be maintained and scaled within the local system for example, how continued physician engagement, funding streams, and policy alignment might support its success. Expanding on these aspects would have provided