SynthesisJournal of graduate medical education2015
A Systematic Review and Qualitative Analysis to Determine Quality Indicators forHealth Professions Education Blogs and Podcasts.
Synthesis in Journal of graduate medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pedagogical Applications, Prospects, and Challenges of Blended Learning in Chinese Higher Education: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Pooled it
- Podcasting in primary care: attitudes of Scottish GP specialty trainees and trainers towards podcast-based education in primary care.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Article
- Instructional Videos for Students in Dental Medicine: Rules of Design and Correlations with Their Habits as Internet Consumers.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024Article
- Quality of Trauma Surgery Podcasts in Credibility, Content, and Design.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- SAEM systematic online academic resource (SOAR) review: Gastrointestinal illnesses.AEM education and training · 2024Article
- Listen to your heart: a critical analysis of popular cardiology podcasts.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- A New Podcast for Reducing Stigma Against People Living With Complex Mental Health Issues: Co-design Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Assessing on-line medical education resources: A primer for acute care medical professionals and others.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2022Article
- Health Care Professional and Caregiver Attitudes Toward and Usage of Medical Podcasting: Questionnaire Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2022Article
- Neurology podcast utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021Article
- The revised Approved Instructional Resources score: An improved quality evaluation tool for online educational resources.AEM education and training · 2021Article
- Holes in the FOAM: An Analysis of Curricular Comprehensiveness in Online Educational Resources.AEM education and training · 2021Article
- Analysing Credibility of UK Social Media Influencers' Weight-Management Blogs: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Blog and Podcast Watch: Infectious Diseases.Cureus · 2020Review
- Development and Psychometric Properties of theFrontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Thinking Critically About Appraising FOAM.AEM education and training · 2019Article
- The Revised METRIQ Score: A Quality Evaluation Tool for Online Educational Resources.AEM education and training · 2019Article
- Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Blog and Podcast Watch: Gastrointestinal Emergencies.Cureus · 2019Review
- Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Blog and Podcast Watch: Renal and Genitourinary Emergencies.Cureus · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHistorically, trainees in undergraduate and graduate health professions education have relied on secondary resources, such as textbooks and lectures, for core learning activities. Recently, blogs and podcasts have entered into mainstream usage, especially for residents and educators. These low-cost, widely available resources have many characteristics of disruptive innovations and, if they continue to improve in quality, have the potential to reinvigorate health professions education. One potential limitation of further growth in the use of these resources is the lack of information on their quality and effectiveness.
objectiveTo identify quality indicators for secondary resources that are described in the literature, which might be applicable to blogs and podcasts.
methodsUsing a blended research methodology, we performed a systematic literature review using Google Scholar, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ERIC to identify quality indicators for secondary resources. A qualitative analysis of these indicators resulted in the organization of this information into themes and subthemes. Expert focus groups were convened to triangulate these findings and ensure that no relevant quality indicators were missed.
resultsThe literature search identified 4530 abstracts, and quality indicators were extracted from 157 articles. The qualitative analysis produced 3 themes (credibility, content, and design), 13 subthemes, and 151 quality indicators.
conclusionsThe list of quality indicators resulting from our analysis can be used by stakeholders, including learners, educators, academic leaders, and blog/podcast producers. Further studies are being conducted, which will refine the list into a form that is more structured and stratified for use by these stakeholders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.