ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023
Eyes for Ears: Usage and Efficacy of a Podcast for Ophthalmic Education.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Podcasting in Ophthalmology: Advancing Education, Knowledge Dissemination, and Implications for Health Equity.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Podcasts in health education-Insights from a scoping review and survey.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Article
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
Purpose: To characterize listenership and perceived educational impact of the ophthalmic podcast "Eyes for Ears". Methods: A cross-sectional, internet-distributed, 9-question Qualtrics survey was made available to podcast listeners. Listenership metrics were analyzed from the podcast host platform. Results: From January 10, 2019 to September 2, 2021, the podcast was downloaded over 422,000 times, averaging about 4442 downloads per episode. 209 Qualtrics survey responses were analyzed from podcast listeners with backgrounds in eye care including medical students, residents, fellows, clinicians and technicians. The majority were residents (60.3%), representative of the target audience of the podcast. Listeners reported using the podcast while commuting (81.3%), felt it increased the time they could spend on self-care (63.2%), and thought it improved their fund of knowledge (99.0%). Respondents recalled feeling better prepared for the OKAP or written boards after using this podcast (before median = 50/100 on Likert Scale, IQR 30-65 vs median = 70/100, IQR 56-81, p <0.001). Respondents identified question banks as the most helpful for OKAP studying, followed by podcasts. Podcasts were preferred over articles and lectures in terms of helpfulness (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The Eyes for Ears podcast has achieved a robust international audience. The surveyed audience felt the podcast was useful for their education and well-being.
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.