Trial reportPloS one2025
The impact of driving versus undistracted listening on podcast knowledge acquisition and retention using a driving simulator: A randomized, cross-over trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionResearch on listening to podcasts while driving suggested no significant difference compared to undistracted listening. However, these studies were conducted in non-controlled driving environments, limiting the evaluation of the environment's impact. This study aimed to compare knowledge acquisition and retention among resident physicians and undergraduate students while listening to medical education podcasts in a controlled, simulator-based, driving environment versus an undistracted listening condition.
methodsA randomized, crossover trial involved 19 residents and 22 undergraduate students from McMaster university and McMaster hospital. Participants listened to podcasts while driving in an immersive, high-fidelity motion simulator that mimics different driving environments: a high-distraction city environment and a low-distraction country environment. In the undistracted listening condition, participants listened to podcasts while being seated at a desk. Immediate and delayed recall tests after a month were administered, and data were analyzed using a 2x2 mixed ANOVA.
resultsThere were no significant differences in knowledge acquisition (e.g., accuracy) between the undistracted, city driving, and country driving conditions (p > 0.05, η2 = 0.011). However, the country driving condition demonstrated slightly higher accuracy compared to the city driving condition in the immediate assessment condition (p < 0.05, η2 = 0.018). Medical expertise level (i.e., resident vs student) did not affect knowledge acquisition across different listening conditions (p > 0.05, η2 = 0.007).
conclusionIn a simulated environment, knowledge acquisition from a podcast is not compromised by the attention needed for driving a vehicle. The two distraction levels used in this experiment showed no significant interference with knowledge acquisition. This holds true regardless of participants' medical expertise. This study highlights the potential of incorporating podcasts into daily commuting to support ongoing education without requiring dedicated study time, enhancing both flexibility and efficiency in professional development.
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.