Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40292916›Full record

ArticleAnatomical sciences education2025

Podcasts in health education-Insights from a scoping review and survey.

Matthew J Barton, Mari Okada, Michael Todorovic

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Anatomy engagement and science communication.Anatomical sciences education · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Matthew J BartonSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Mari OkadaSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia.
Michael TodorovicSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0806-5610

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Podcasts have rapidly emerged as a powerful tool for health communication, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. While evidence shows that podcasts can enhance student knowledge, confidence, and flexibility in learning, their educational impact is primarily studied within formal academic contexts. Despite their popularity and potential, little is known about how bioscience-focused health podcasts engage broader audiences beyond structured health education programs. Limited research examines who listens, why they choose podcasts, and how this format influences their learning or behavior. To address this, we used a mixed-methods approach comprising a scoping review and an exploratory online survey. The scoping review, following PRISMA guidelines, identified 14 eligible studies published between 2008 and 2024. The survey, distributed via social media and Dr. Matt & Dr. Mike's Medical Education Podcast, captured responses from 226 participants-predominantly aged 25-34 and mostly from the USA-with two-thirds enrolled in health programs. Participants cited access to expert insights, enjoyment, and the ability to multitask as key reasons for podcast use. Content relevance and presenter expertise were rated the most important factors when selecting a health podcast. The preferred episode length was 30-60 min. On average, participants rated the impact of podcasts on their health knowledge at 4.22 out of 5, with 58% reporting changes in health-related behaviors. These findings suggest that podcasts offer a flexible, engaging way to communicate bioscience-focused health content and support learning across diverse audiences. Educators should consider listener motivations and preferences when integrating podcasts into educational practice.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health EducationWebcasts as TopicAdultFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and Questionnairesbioscienceeducationhealthmedicalpodcast

Identifiers

PMID40292916
PMCPMC12702820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.