ArticleJMIR medical education2016
A Critical Analysis of Anesthesiology Podcasts: Identifying Determinants of Success.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- 'Learning from home': role of e-learning methodologies and tools during novel coronavirus pandemic outbreak.Postgraduate medical journal · 2021Pooled it
- The Use of Podcasts as Patient Preparation for Hospital Visits-An Interview Study Exploring Patients' Experiences.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Listen to your heart: a critical analysis of popular cardiology podcasts.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Podcasting as a Learning Tool in Medical Education: Prior to and During the Pandemic PeriodBalkan medical journal · 2022Review
- Podcast-Based Learning in Otolaryngology: Availability, Breadth, and Comparison with Other Specialties.The Laryngoscope · 2021Article
- How to Create and Evaluate a Resident-Led Audio Program: Six Clinical Podcasts for Medicine House Staff.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2020Article
- Development and Psychometric Properties of theFrontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Understanding the Use and Perceived Impact of a Medical Podcast: Qualitative Study.JMIR medical education · 2019Article
- Texting Brief Podcasts to Deliver Faculty Development to Community-Based Preceptors in Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2018Article
- Evolution of social media: review of the role of podcasts in gynaecology.International urogynecology journal · 2018Review
- Mobile Apps for Teaching Intubation: Scoping Review and Critical Analysis in eLearning.JMIR medical education · 2017Article
- How Social Media is Changing the Practice of Regional Anesthesiology.Current anesthesiology reports · 2017Article
- Creation and Evaluation of an Anesthesiology and Critical Care Podcast.The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAudio and video podcasts have gained popularity in recent years. Increasingly, podcasts are being used in the field of medicine as a tool to disseminate information. This format has multiple advantages including highly accessible creation tools, low distribution costs, and portability for the user. However, despite its ongoing use in medical education, there are no data describing factors associated with the success or quality of podcasts.
objectiveThe goal of the study was to assess the landscape of anesthesia podcasts in Canada and develop a methodology for evaluating the quality of the podcast. To achieve our objective, we identified the scope of podcasts in anesthesia specifically, constructed an algorithmic model for measuring success, and identified factors linked to both successful podcasts and a peer-review process.
methodsIndependent reviewers performed a systematic search of anesthesia-related podcasts on iTunes Canada. Data and metrics recorded for each podcast included podcast's authorship, number posted, podcast series duration, target audience, topics, and social media presence. Descriptive statistics summarized mined data, and univariate analysis was used to identify factors associated with podcast success and a peer-review process.
resultsTwenty-two podcasts related to anesthesia were included in the final analysis. Less than a third (6/22=27%) were still active. The median longevity of the podcasts' series was just 13 months (interquartile range: 1-39 months). Anesthesiologists were the target audience for 77% of podcast series with clinical topics being most commonly addressed. We defined a novel algorithm for measuring success: Podcast Success Index. Factors associated with a high Podcast Success Index included podcasts targeting fellows (Spearman R=0.434; P=.04), inclusion of professional topics (Spearman R=0.456-0.603; P=.01-.03), and the use of Twitter as a means of social media (Spearman R=0.453;P=.03). In addition, more than two-thirds (16/22=73%) of podcasts demonstrated evidence of peer review with podcasts targeting anesthesiologists most strongly associated with peer-reviewed podcasts (Spearman R=0.886; P=.004)
conclusionsWe present the first report on the scope of anesthesia podcasts in Canada. We have developed a novel tool for assessing the success of an anesthesiology podcast series and identified factors linked to this success measure as well as evidence of a peer-review process for a given podcast. To enable advancement in this area of anesthesia e-resources, podcast creators and users should consider factors associated with success when creating podcasts. The lack of these aspects may be associated with the early demise of a podcast series.
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.