From Evidence to Case-Based Learning: How VLMA Aims to Support Practice-Relevant Lifestyle Medicine Education in Viet Nam
LIFESTYLE MEDICINE IN VIET NAMEVIDENCE & CLINICAL PRACTICE
From Evidence to Case-Based Learning: How VLMA Aims to Support Practice-Relevant Lifestyle Medicine Education in Viet Nam
Primary category: Lifestyle Medicine in Viet Nam
Secondary category: Evidence & Clinical Practice
Article type: VLMA Perspective
Last reviewed: October 22, 2026
Reading scientific research is an essential part of professional learning. Understanding what that research means when a healthcare situation becomes more complicated requires a different kind of thinking.
A healthcare professional may be familiar with evidence supporting lifestyle-related interventions but still encounter questions that cannot be answered by recalling a recommendation. A person may be living with several health conditions, have difficulty accessing follow-up services, or face work and family responsibilities that make recommended changes difficult to sustain.
The evidence remains important. So does understanding its limitations, the circumstances in which it may apply, and the professional responsibilities involved.
Case-based learning offers one way to explore these questions. By placing scientific information within a carefully designed scenario, educators can encourage learners to examine assumptions, recognize uncertainty, consider different perspectives, and explain their reasoning.
The Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance (VLMA) aims to support the responsible development of Lifestyle Medicine education in Viet Nam. Our Education platform identifies case-based learning and discussion among the approaches that may contribute to professional development.
We are interested in this approach because healthcare professionals need opportunities to do more than receive information. They also need to consider what the evidence supports, what remains uncertain, and how professional responsibilities influence its appropriate use.
Our intention is not to turn educational cases into treatment protocols or suggest that participation in a discussion establishes clinical competence. We want to explore how well-designed learning activities could help professionals develop a more thoughtful understanding of evidence-based Lifestyle Medicine within their authorized roles.
This article explains the educational principles we consider important and how they could inform future VLMA activities. It does not imply that VLMA has already established a formal case-based curriculum, a validated assessment system, or an educational program demonstrated to improve clinical performance or patient outcomes.
Why Case-Based Learning Deserves Attention
Scientific publications and educational cases serve different purposes.
A research article may explain how an intervention was studied, which participants were included, what outcomes were measured, and what conclusions the findings support.
A case-based learning activity brings selected information into a recognizable professional situation and invites learners to consider what that evidence means in context.
The purpose is not to replace scientific research with a simplified story. It is to help learners connect knowledge with professional reasoning.
Consider a discussion about lifestyle-related support for people living with chronic conditions. Participants may already understand the general evidence supporting nutrition, physical activity, or behavior-change interventions.
A carefully designed case can introduce circumstances that make interpreting that evidence less straightforward. The person described may have difficulty attending follow-up appointments, face competing responsibilities, or require input from several professional disciplines.
Instead of asking learners only to recall the benefits of an intervention, the discussion can explore what additional information would be needed, which conclusions are supported by research, and where professional responsibilities begin and end.
This creates an opportunity to recognize the difference between knowing a recommendation and understanding the considerations involved in its application.
A realist review by Daly and colleagues, published in Medical Education in 2026, examined 25 studies of case-based learning in undergraduate health professions education.
The review identified several interacting factors associated with educational outcomes, including the authenticity of cases, involvement of clinical facilitators, learner engagement, institutional support, and the learning environment. It also identified challenges involving group dynamics and assessment approaches that did not adequately support collaborative learning.
These findings are useful, but their scope must be recognized. The review focused on undergraduate education across different countries, healthcare disciplines, and institutions.
It does not establish that every case-based activity is effective, that this approach is necessarily superior to other teaching methods, or that educational benefits will automatically translate into improved patient outcomes.
Nor can its findings be transferred directly to every continuing professional education program in Viet Nam without considering differences in participants, learning objectives, resources, and educational settings.
For VLMA, the important lesson is that educational value depends on how a case is developed, how the discussion is facilitated, and what participants are expected to learn.
Presenting an interesting clinical story is not enough.
Begin With a Clear Learning Objective
A useful case should begin with a defined educational purpose.
Before creating the scenario, educators need to consider what participants should understand, recognize, or be able to explain after the activity.
Without that focus, a case discussion may become an interesting exchange of professional opinions without achieving a clear learning objective.
If the purpose is to strengthen evidence interpretation, participants might be asked to distinguish research-supported findings from assumptions about the clinical setting.
If the objective concerns professional boundaries, the discussion may explore which questions fall within participants' responsibilities and when additional expertise would be required.
If patient safety is the focus, the activity might emphasize recognizing uncertainty, identifying missing information, and understanding why certain situations require authorized clinical assessment.
These objectives are related, but they are not identical. Trying to address all of them in one case can make the discussion unnecessarily complicated.
The World Health Organization's Global Competency and Outcomes Framework for Universal Health Coverage, published in 2022, provides useful guidance on connecting educational outcomes with learning activities and assessment.
The framework identifies six competency domains: people-centeredness, decision-making, communication, collaboration, evidence-informed practice, and personal conduct.
Although developed primarily through the lens of preservice health professions education, it also provides guidance relevant to competency-based education during professional practice.
It is not a Lifestyle Medicine-specific curriculum or a Vietnamese professional competency standard. Nevertheless, its emphasis on aligning learning objectives, educational activities, and assessment offers a useful foundation.
For VLMA, the learning objective should determine how much information a case contains, which questions participants are asked, and how the discussion is concluded.
A short activity may help a healthcare professional recognize an important limitation in the evidence or understand another professional's role more clearly.
That can be a worthwhile educational outcome, provided it is described accurately. It should not be presented as proof of comprehensive clinical competence.
Designing a Case That Reflects Practice Without Becoming a Treatment Protocol
A learning case should feel relevant to situations healthcare professionals may encounter.
That does not mean it must reproduce an actual patient's medical record or include every clinical detail that might arise during a consultation.
A fictional scenario can be realistic when it reflects recognizable healthcare circumstances and provides enough information to support the intended discussion.
For example, a case might describe an adult receiving ongoing care for chronic health conditions who has been given general lifestyle-related recommendations but encounters difficulties because of irregular working hours, family responsibilities, or limited access to follow-up.
These details create a context in which learners can examine the relationship between scientific evidence and everyday circumstances.
However, realism should serve the learning objective.
Adding laboratory results, medication lists, diagnostic details, or complex clinical histories may be unnecessary when the purpose is to discuss evidence interpretation or professional boundaries.
Information unrelated to the learning objective can distract participants, encourage speculation, or unintentionally turn the activity into an exercise in clinical management.
A well-designed case should distinguish between information that is provided, assumptions participants may be making, and information that remains unknown.
Leaving some details unanswered can be educationally useful.
For instance, learners may recognize that they cannot determine whether a recommendation is appropriate for the fictional person without additional clinical information or professional assessment.
Recognizing that limitation may be more valuable than reaching a confident conclusion based on incomplete information.
The case should also avoid reinforcing stereotypes.
Someone who finds lifestyle recommendations difficult to follow should not automatically be portrayed as unmotivated, irresponsible, or unwilling to improve their health.
Work, financial circumstances, disability, caregiving responsibilities, personal preferences, and access to services may influence what is feasible.
These factors can be included without making assumptions about a person's character.
The Vietnamese context deserves similar attention.
A fictional case set in a Vietnamese healthcare facility should not assume that every hospital, outpatient clinic, or primary care setting has the same staffing, referral arrangements, consultation time, or multidisciplinary support.
At the same time, one illustrative scenario cannot represent the diversity of healthcare practice across Viet Nam.
For VLMA, a useful case is one that feels recognizable while remaining focused, respectful, and scientifically responsible.
Its purpose is to support learning, not to prescribe a preferred clinical pathway.
Keeping Scientific Evidence at the Center of the Discussion
An engaging case can sometimes become more influential than the scientific evidence it was intended to illustrate.
Participants may recognize similar situations from their work, recall personal experiences, or suggest familiar approaches.
These contributions can enrich the discussion, but familiarity does not establish scientific validity.
A case-based learning activity should therefore maintain a clear connection to reliable sources.
Depending on the educational objective, relevant guidelines, systematic reviews, original studies, or other authoritative materials may be provided before the activity or introduced at appropriate points during discussion.
The facilitator should help participants consider what those sources establish and what remains uncertain.
For example, research may support an intervention delivered under particular conditions without demonstrating that a modified version would produce comparable results.
A clinical guideline may provide an established recommendation while leaving questions about its implementation in a specific healthcare setting.
A professional's experience may help identify a practical difficulty without demonstrating the effectiveness or safety of an intervention for a wider population.
These distinctions matter.
The purpose is not to require participants to cite a publication for every statement. It is to encourage them to recognize when an important claim needs supporting evidence and when they are offering an interpretation or professional opinion.
Where the available evidence is incomplete, the discussion should acknowledge that limitation.
Not every educational case needs to end with a single definitive answer.
Sometimes an appropriate learning outcome is recognizing that additional information is required, that more than one interpretation remains reasonable, or that the research cannot resolve the question being considered.
This is especially relevant to Lifestyle Medicine, where general recommendations may need to be considered alongside existing medical conditions, treatment requirements, professional responsibilities, and individual circumstances.
A responsible discussion should help learners understand uncertainty more accurately rather than replace it with an unsupported sense of certainty.
Guiding Discussion Without Replacing Professional Judgment
The learning experience depends not only on the case and its supporting evidence, but also on how the discussion is guided.
A facilitator helps participants remain focused on the learning objective, examine relevant claims, identify misunderstandings, and consider different professional perspectives.
Appropriate subject-matter knowledge is important, but effective facilitation also requires the ability to ask useful questions, manage discussion, and provide constructive feedback.
The 2026 realist review by Daly and colleagues highlighted the importance of clinical facilitators, authentic cases, institutional support, and a learning environment in which participants feel able to engage.
These findings suggest that facilitator preparation deserves attention whenever case-based activities are developed.
For VLMA, the facilitator's role should remain educational.
Participants may suggest different interpretations or raise questions extending beyond the available evidence. The facilitator should help clarify what is supported, what remains uncertain, and which matters require expertise outside the discussion.
When specialized clinical questions arise, additional subject-matter expertise may be necessary.
Facilitators should also recognize the limits of their own knowledge and avoid presenting speculation as professional consensus.
A productive learning environment allows participants to ask questions, reconsider assumptions, and disagree respectfully.
This can be particularly important in multidisciplinary groups, where participants may differ in professional experience, familiarity with case-based learning, or confidence in speaking during discussions.
Language can also influence participation. Where learning activities involve international materials or English-language scientific publications, educators should consider whether terminology or language barriers may affect understanding.
The aim is to encourage thoughtful participation without assuming that everyone learns most effectively in the same way.
Openness to different perspectives does not mean that every opinion has equal scientific support.
A good discussion should allow participants to explore those differences while maintaining respect for evidence and professional responsibility.
An Illustrative Lifestyle Medicine Learning Case
Consider the following entirely fictional scenario.
An adult receiving outpatient care for chronic health conditions has been advised to consider lifestyle-related changes as part of ongoing healthcare management.
The person works irregular hours, supports a family member, and finds it difficult to arrange regular follow-up appointments.
The healthcare professional involved is familiar with international recommendations on lifestyle interventions but is uncertain about how some of the supporting research relates to the services available locally.
Other healthcare professionals may have relevant expertise, although their availability and responsibilities differ according to the setting.
This scenario has been created solely for educational illustration. It does not describe an actual patient, use a real medical record, or contain patient-specific clinical measurements or treatment instructions.
A facilitator could use the case to explore how participants interpret evidence in context.
The discussion might begin by asking which scientific claims need to be examined and which authoritative sources could help clarify them. Participants could review selected research or guideline excerpts appropriate to the educational objective.
They could then consider what the sources establish, what information is missing from the scenario, and which assumptions they may be making about the person's circumstances.
Another part of the discussion could focus on professional responsibilities.
Which questions fall within participants' own roles? What would require additional expertise or authorized clinical assessment? What can be concluded from the available evidence, and what remains uncertain?
The activity would not require participants to select medications, prescribe an exercise program, determine an individualized dietary intervention, or construct a treatment pathway.
Those decisions are outside the educational purpose of this example.
Instead, after examining the selected sources, participants might be invited to identify a claim adequately supported by the material, an important limitation, and a question requiring further professional or institutional consideration.
Their responses could help the facilitator determine whether the intended educational points had been recognized.
They would not establish that participants are competent to manage a comparable clinical situation independently.
The example illustrates how a relatively simple fictional scenario can support focused learning.
Making the case more clinically complicated would not necessarily make it more educationally valuable.
Learning Across Disciplines While Respecting Professional Boundaries
Lifestyle Medicine involves knowledge relevant to several healthcare disciplines.
Physicians, nurses, clinical nutrition professionals, pharmacists, rehabilitation professionals, public health practitioners, and other appropriately qualified individuals may encounter different aspects of lifestyle-related care.
Their responsibilities are not identical.
A case-based discussion can provide opportunities to understand how these perspectives connect.
One participant may focus on the evidence supporting an intervention, while another recognizes a communication difficulty or practical barrier affecting follow-up.
A professional from another discipline may identify an issue requiring specialized assessment or expertise beyond the responsibilities of those participating.
These exchanges can broaden understanding without suggesting that every participant is authorized to perform the same clinical activities.
The objective is not to make healthcare professionals interchangeable. It is to improve awareness of professional contributions, responsibilities, and limitations.
Learning activities may therefore need to be adapted according to participants' backgrounds and experience.
Students may benefit from identifying basic evidence-related questions and understanding professional roles.
Experienced healthcare professionals may be prepared to examine more complex issues involving evidence interpretation, interdisciplinary communication, or the limitations of applying research across different healthcare settings.
In either situation, the learning activity should remain appropriate to participants' training and responsibilities.
Participation in a case discussion does not confer a professional qualification, establish independent clinical competence, or expand an individual's lawful scope of practice.
Recognizing those boundaries is itself an important educational outcome.
Protecting Patient Privacy When Cases Are Used for Education
Case-based learning does not require identifiable patient information.
For VLMA, fictional scenarios developed specifically for education would generally provide a practical starting point, particularly for discussions involving participants from different institutions or materials intended for wider distribution.
A fictional case can be realistic without disclosing anyone's personal health information.
Actual clinical cases create additional responsibilities.
Removing a person's name or medical record number does not necessarily make the remaining information anonymous.
A combination of age, occupation, location, dates, unusual health conditions, or other circumstances may still allow an individual to be identified.
The United Kingdom's General Medical Council provides guidance on using patient information for education and training, including the need to protect confidentiality and use anonymized information wherever practicable.
These principles are professionally relevant, although they do not replace Vietnamese legal requirements.
A distinction should also be made between fictional and composite cases.
A fictional case is created for educational purposes without reproducing a specific person's circumstances.
A composite case may combine elements drawn from several real experiences. Even when details are altered, the resulting information could still reveal someone's identity or confidential circumstances.
Describing a case as composite should not automatically be taken to mean that it is anonymous.
In Viet Nam, relevant legal requirements include the Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15 and Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP, both effective January 1, 2026.
Healthcare confidentiality obligations, institutional policies, and other applicable legal and ethical requirements must also be considered.
If actual clinical information is necessary for an educational activity, the responsible parties must establish an appropriate lawful basis, relevant authorizations, and suitable safeguards before using or disclosing it.
Permission to discuss a case within a healthcare organization does not automatically authorize sharing it with an external professional group or publishing it on a website.
For VLMA, the most proportionate approach is to avoid collecting or sharing identifiable patient information when the learning objective can be achieved through a carefully designed fictional scenario.
Educational authenticity should never depend on unnecessary disclosure of private information.
Closing a Case Discussion With Reflection
A case-based activity should help participants leave with a clearer understanding of the issue being examined.
That requires more than presenting a scenario, allowing discussion, and ending when the allocated time has passed.
A facilitated closing discussion can help learners reconsider their initial assumptions, identify what they have learned, and distinguish conclusions supported by evidence from questions that remain unresolved.
The facilitator may return to the original learning objective and ask whether it has been addressed.
Participants might be invited to explain which evidence was most relevant, what additional information would be needed, or which professional responsibilities became clearer during the discussion.
This can be particularly useful when participants initially reached different conclusions.
The objective is not necessarily to eliminate disagreement.
Where authoritative recommendations are clear, learners should recognize them accurately. Where uncertainty remains, it should be acknowledged rather than converted into an artificial consensus.
Reflection can also reveal weaknesses in the educational activity itself.
Perhaps the scenario lacked information necessary to address the learning objective. The questions may have been too broad, or the supporting materials may not have explained an important limitation.
These observations can help improve future case development and facilitation.
The World Health Organization's Patient Safety Curriculum Guide: Multi-professional Edition provides useful guidance on teaching patient safety, teamwork, communication, and learning from healthcare situations.
Although it is not a dedicated Lifestyle Medicine curriculum, its educational principles are relevant to the responsible design of case-based activities.
For VLMA, the central consideration is whether the discussion helps participants understand the issue more accurately and recognize the limits of their knowledge.
An enjoyable discussion can be valuable, but enjoyment alone is not sufficient evidence that learning has occurred.
Evaluating Learning Without Overstating Its Impact
If VLMA develops case-based learning activities, evaluation should reflect their intended educational objectives.
Attendance may indicate interest and participation. Positive feedback may suggest that learners find an activity engaging or relevant.
Neither measure establishes that professional competence has improved.
A discussion intended to strengthen evidence interpretation might be evaluated through participants' ability to distinguish supported findings from unsupported assumptions.
An activity focused on professional boundaries might examine whether learners can recognize situations requiring expertise or authorization beyond their own responsibilities.
A multidisciplinary discussion might consider whether participants can explain relevant contributions from other professions without making incorrect claims about their authority.
These approaches may provide information about selected learning outcomes.
However, conclusions must remain proportionate to what was assessed.
Correctly answering questions about a fictional case does not demonstrate that someone can independently manage a similar situation in clinical practice.
A participant who explains their reasoning well during discussion has not necessarily demonstrated competence in direct patient care.
Similarly, improved knowledge or confidence after an educational activity does not automatically mean that clinical behavior has changed or patient outcomes have improved.
Those outcomes require different evaluation methods and, where relevant, appropriate involvement from healthcare organizations.
The 2026 realist review of case-based learning also highlighted concerns about assessment approaches that emphasize visible participation without adequately supporting collaborative learning.
This reinforces the need to consider not only what is measured, but also how assessment may influence the educational experience.
For VLMA, a focused evaluation of defined learning objectives would be more appropriate than broad claims about professional performance based only on attendance, satisfaction, or a short discussion.
Learner feedback may also help identify whether cases are understandable, relevant, appropriately challenging, and supported by sufficient evidence.
Such information can guide improvements even when more extensive evaluation is not feasible.
Developing Case-Based Learning Within VLMA's Capabilities
VLMA's Education platform identifies case-based learning and discussion as possible formats for professional development.
This provides an appropriate direction for future work, but it should not be interpreted as confirmation that VLMA already operates a standardized case library, formal curriculum, accredited educational program, or validated assessment system.
A responsible approach would begin with clearly identified educational needs and activities that match the expertise and resources available.
Possible formats may include facilitated discussions using fictional scenarios, focused evidence-based learning sessions, or multidisciplinary exchanges about common professional questions.
The cases selected should reflect their intended learning objectives, relevance to Vietnamese healthcare, availability of credible evidence, and the expertise required to facilitate discussion appropriately.
Preparation requires time and professional effort.
Developing a scenario, selecting supporting sources, preparing discussion questions, and considering how learning might be evaluated all require attention.
A case that appears simple to participants may require substantial preparation to ensure that its assumptions, content, and references are appropriate.
If an activity is developed with a university, hospital, clinic, or another organization, responsibilities for educational content, facilitation, participant assessment, clinical governance where relevant, and data protection should be clarified in advance.
Formal continuing professional education involves additional requirements.
On August 10, 2026, Viet Nam's Ministry of Health issued Decision No. 2546/QD-BYT, establishing quality assurance standards for continuing training and continuing medical knowledge updating for healthcare personnel.
The standards address educational programs, teaching resources, educator requirements, assessment, and quality assurance arrangements.
Their application must be considered according to the nature of the educational activity and the legal and institutional status of the organizations involved.
An informal professional case discussion is not automatically equivalent to a formally recognized continuing medical education program.
Likewise, participating in a VLMA learning activity does not independently provide recognized CME/CPD credits, professional licensure, a specialty qualification, or certification from the International Board of Lifestyle Medicine.
Any recognized educational credit or formal qualification would require the applicable authorization and arrangements to be in place and clearly communicated.
VLMA should remain transparent about these distinctions as its educational activities develop.
The goal is to support responsible professional learning without creating expectations that exceed the organization's actual educational capacity or authority.
From Evidence to Case-Based Learning: Our Commitment
VLMA has developed Knowledge & Evidence resources addressing a growing range of Lifestyle Medicine topics.
These publications provide a foundation for professional learning. Case-based education may offer another way to engage with that knowledge by placing selected scientific questions within realistic educational situations.
A well-designed case can encourage learners to examine evidence, recognize assumptions, consider professional responsibilities, and identify information that is still needed.
It may also help participants understand how colleagues from different disciplines approach the same professional question.
However, those benefits depend on the quality of the educational design and should not be assumed simply because a clinical scenario is presented.
Not every subject requires case-based learning, and not every professional question benefits from group discussion.
Sometimes an authoritative guideline, a focused evidence summary, or another educational format will be more appropriate.
The educational method should follow the learning need rather than the desire to use a particular teaching technique.
For VLMA, the aim is not to develop a collection of clinical stories for their own sake.
We want to consider how educational cases could help healthcare professionals ask better questions, interpret scientific evidence more carefully, learn from other disciplines, and recognize the limits of their responsibilities.
This work will require appropriate expertise, preparation, safeguards, and continued learning.
We do not intend to replace established healthcare education institutions, professional supervision, or clinical decision-making.
Our intended contribution is to strengthen the connection between reliable scientific knowledge and professional learning that is relevant to Vietnamese healthcare.
For VLMA, moving from evidence to case-based learning is not about teaching healthcare professionals to memorize a preferred answer. It is about helping them understand what the evidence supports, recognize what they still need to know, and discuss professional responsibilities with greater clarity.
That is one practical direction through which we hope to connect scientific evidence, professional capability, and responsible Lifestyle Medicine practice in Viet Nam.
Selected References
Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance. Lifestyle Medicine Education and Professional Development. VLMA; 2026.
Daly R, Tunney E, Spooner M, Offiah G, Flood K, Kent F. Case-based learning (CBL) in undergraduate health professions education: A realist review. Medical Education. 2026;60(8):846–864. First published online February 4, 2026. doi:10.1111/medu.70179.
World Health Organization. Global Competency and Outcomes Framework for Universal Health Coverage. WHO; 2022. ISBN: 978-92-4-003466-2.
World Health Organization. Patient Safety Curriculum Guide: Multi-professional Edition. WHO; 2011. ISBN: 978-92-4-150195-8.
General Medical Council. Confidentiality: Disclosing Information for Education and Training Purposes. United Kingdom. Effective April 25, 2017; updated December 13, 2024.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15, as amended. Consolidated Text No. 26/VBHN-VPQH, February 26, 2026.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. Decision No. 2546/QD-BYT on the Quality Assurance Standards for Continuing Training and Continuing Medical Knowledge Updating for Healthcare Personnel. August 10, 2026.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15. Effective January 1, 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP Detailing Certain Articles and Measures for Implementing the Law on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026.
Editorial and Professional Scope Note
This article presents the organizational perspective and intended educational direction of the Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance as of October 2026. It is intended for professional information, education, and knowledge exchange. It does not constitute a clinical practice guideline, individualized medical advice, a clinical training protocol, a formal competency assessment, or an official regulatory interpretation.
The fictional educational scenario and examples of case-based learning activities are illustrative. They do not describe actual patients, completed VLMA educational programs, validated assessment instruments, or demonstrated improvements in clinical practice or patient outcomes. References to proposed educational formats, facilitation, evaluation, and case development describe potential activities unless explicitly identified as established VLMA practices.
VLMA is a physician-led professional platform operated by Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance Company Limited. It is not a healthcare service provider or medical licensing authority. Participation in VLMA educational activities does not independently establish clinical competence, grant professional licensure, expand lawful scope of practice, or provide recognized CME/CPD credits or IBLM certification.
Any future educational activities involving clinical information, healthcare institutions, formal professional training, or personal data must comply with applicable Vietnamese legal, professional, ethical, institutional, and data protection requirements.
Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance
Evidence-Based Lifestyle Medicine for Viet Nam.
Contact
contact@vlma.org
Saigon Paragon Building, No. 3 Nguyen Luong Bang Street, Tan My Ward, HCMC
+84 909 228 476
+84 84 9999 911
© 2025 - 2026. Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance. All rights reserved.
A physician-led professional platform advancing Lifestyle Medicine through education, collaboration, research, and responsible implementation.
VLMA is operated by Vietnam Lifestyle Medicine Alliance Company Limited, Enterprise Registration Number 0318902666.
VLMA is a Sister Organization of the Lifestyle Medicine Global Alliance and a Member Organization of the Planetary Health Alliance.
VLMA is not a medical service provider and does not issue medical licenses or IBLM certification.
