Interview with Uri Kopylov, new e-Learning Editor-in-Chief

There is actually a very broad range of material on the platform, and it is designed for the whole multidisciplinary IBD team, from gastroenterologists and surgeons to nurses and dietitians. We recently restructured it because we wanted to make the content much easier to find and use, and a lot of it is now freely available without a login.

At the core are the IBD Curricula for physicians and nurses. I think these are particularly important because they define what an IBD professional should know and then link each topic to the relevant educational material. We also have case-based e-Courses, developed by ECCO experts and based on ECCO Guidelines and Topical Reviews, with self-assessment and a certificate on completion. There is also a strong practical component. The advanced training programmes cover intestinal ultrasound, capsule endoscopy, endoscopy and endoscopic scoring, together with practical skills videos. The e-Guide is another very useful tool because it takes the UC and CD guidelines and translates them into clinical algorithms that can be used in everyday practice.

Then we have expert podcasts and Talking Heads debates on specialised topics and areas where there is still discussion or controversy. A new podcast series led by Sophie Restellini and Nurulamin Noor will also be launched at the coming ECCO Congress. And finally, the e-Library contains the recorded Congress presentations. These are now searchable by keyword and are available with automated translation into several languages, which I think makes a big difference in terms of accessibility.

I think people use the platform in quite different ways depending on where they are in their careers and what they need at that particular moment. Trainees and younger gastroenterologists often use the curricula and e-Courses to build their knowledge in a structured way and to test themselves. Someone who is more experienced may come for something very specific—perhaps to check an algorithm, learn more about a new technique or catch up on a Congress session they missed.

And it is not only for physicians. Nurses, dietitians and other members of the multidisciplinary team can also find material that is directly relevant to their own work. So I see it as serving two purposes: it can provide structured education, but it can also be something you use in the middle of everyday clinical practice when you need a particular piece of information.

For me, the most useful material is probably the material that helps you with a real clinical problem. The case-based e-Courses and the e-Guide are good examples because they take the guidelines and bring them much closer to the decisions we actually make in the clinic. That is very different from simply reading a guideline document from beginning to end. I also think the self-assessment tools are important because they give people a chance to see where their own gaps are, rather than just passively going through material.

There is also clearly a growing need for practical skills training, particularly in areas such as intestinal ultrasound and endoscopy as these techniques become increasingly integrated into routine IBD care. The other thing that matters is flexibility. Most clinicians are very busy, and being able to listen to a short podcast or quickly find one particular Congress presentation is often much more realistic than sitting down for a long course.

For me, the first thing is that the content has to stay current. IBD is changing very quickly, and when ECCO publishes new guidance, the educational material really needs to follow. So we are continuously reviewing the existing e-Courses and e-Guide algorithms and developing new material around recently published guidelines.

I also want the curricula to become much more central to the way people use the platform. Ideally, if you are interested in a particular curriculum topic, you should immediately see the relevant course, video, questions and other resources. You should not have to search through a huge library to work out what is useful to you. We have already done quite a lot to make the platform easier to navigate, including restructuring it and introducing keyword search across the Congress material, but there is still more we can do.

And something that is very important to me is that we do not decide everything from the top down. We need to hear much more systematically from the people actually using the platform—what works for them, what does not and what they feel is missing.

I really see them as different parts of the same ecosystem. JCC and JCC Plus are where the evidence, reviews and guidelines are published, while the Congress is where new data are presented and where we discuss and debate what they mean.

The e-Learning Platform has a slightly different role. It takes that knowledge and turns it into something you can learn from and use—cases, algorithms, questions, skills training and so on. And of course, it also gives Congress content a much longer life. If you could not attend a particular session, or you want to go back to it six months later, it is still there.

I think AI can be useful in two quite different ways: one is behind the scenes, in how we produce and maintain content, and the other is in how people actually use the platform. On the production side, there is clearly an opportunity to shorten the time between the publication of a new guideline and turning that into e-Courses, algorithms or self-assessment questions. AI can also help us look across the existing material and identify areas that may need updating. That could save a lot of time, particularly when you are dealing with such a large volume of content.

But for me, the really exciting part is helping people find the right information. We already have a huge amount of high-quality material. The problem is that people do not always know it exists or know where to look for it. Ideally, a clinician should be able to ask a clinical question in ordinary language and immediately be directed to the relevant ECCO Guideline statement, course, lecture or algorithm. I think that could completely change how people interact with the platform.

Later on, AI may also allow us to tailor learning much more to the individual, for example by suggesting content based on someone's level or on gaps identified through self-assessment. But I think we have to be very clear about one thing: AI can support the process, but the content itself still needs to be reviewed and approved by ECCO experts. That expert oversight is what gives the platform its credibility.

I think one of the biggest challenges is simply keeping up with the pace of change. IBD is moving very quickly, and if you have a large educational platform, keeping everything current becomes a continuous process. And of course, the people writing and reviewing this material are experts who are doing it alongside very busy clinical and academic jobs.

Another major challenge is attention. A clinician can now type a question into a search engine or an AI tool and get an answer within seconds. At the same time, there is an enormous amount of free educational material online, and the quality and independence of that material vary enormously. So I do not think the answer is simply to produce more content. We have to make trusted, expert-reviewed content just as easy to reach.

The other challenge is that our audience is extremely diverse. We are talking about trainees and very experienced specialists, but also different professions within the IBD team and people working in healthcare systems with completely different resources. Finding ways to make the same platform genuinely useful across all of those settings is not simple.

What I would really like over the next few years is for the platform to become much easier and more intuitive to use, without losing the depth and quality that make ECCO Education distinctive. Obviously, keeping everything closely aligned with current ECCO guidance is fundamental. But beyond that, I want people to be able to find what they need much more easily, whether that is through better navigation, better search or, eventually, AI-based tools.

I also want us to expand what we offer to the whole multidisciplinary team. IBD care today is not something delivered by one profession, and our educational platform should reflect that much more clearly, including more content for nurses, dietitians, pathologists and other members of the team. AI will definitely be part of this as well. For users, it should make it much easier to get to the right content at the right moment. Behind the scenes, it should help us create and update material more efficiently, while ECCO experts retain full editorial control.

And I would like us to become much better at understanding how people actually use the platform and what they really need from it. I think that is more important than simply producing more and more content. In the end, it all serves one aim: to maintain and strengthen ECCO's place as the leading source of IBD knowledge and expertise worldwide.