ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2026
Female Representation and Quality Indicators in Anesthesiology and Critical Care Podcasts.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPodcasts have emerged as prominent tools for asynchronous medical education, widely adopted across training levels and specialties. Diverse representation strengthens medical discourse, making an evaluation of speaker demographics essential for understanding equity and quality in digital knowledge dissemination. This study systematically evaluates female representation and quality assurance indicators in anesthesiology and critical care podcasts, including longitudinal publication trends.
methodsWe systematically searched Apple Podcasts and Spotify using specialty-specific terms and manually reviewed the top twenty journals in the field for affiliated podcasts. Included were active, English-language, physician-hosted podcasts.
resultsEighty-five podcasts (53.0% US-based) comprising 10,190 episodes were analyzed. Of 12,522 hosts, 31.5% (n = 3945) were female; of 10,822 guests, 35.9% (n = 3882) were female. Notably, among US-based podcasts, female guest representation exceeded the 26.5% female workforce proportion among US anesthesiologists. Episodes with exclusively male hosts had 2.13 times the odds of featuring only male guests (95% CI 1.88-2.41). A positive trend of increasing female participation was observed from 2010 to 2024. Content support was variable: using broad, inclusive definitions, 42.0% of episodes had show notes and 48.4% provided supplemental material. Analysis of quality-related structures showed that 40.0% (n = 34) of podcasts produced episodes linked to a publication, 50.6% featured some episodes with three or more speakers, 21.2% of podcasts were journal-affiliated, and 20.0% were university-affiliated.
conclusionWhile a sex imbalance persists in anesthesiology and critical care podcasting, female participation among US-based podcasts exceeds local workforce demographic benchmarks, with a clear positive trend from 2010 to 2024. However, persistent sex similarity in speaker selection suggests ongoing biases. Quality assurance mechanisms remain highly variable, highlighting opportunities for incremental improvement. Future efforts could focus on structured guest selection and transparent quality indicators to accelerate progress toward equitable representation and educational quality in this influential medium. EDITORIAL COMMENT: In modern times, many clinicians look for, and listen to, podcasts aimed at education in clinical specialties. This sampling of podcasts related to our specialty looked at how females and males contributed to podcast content generation and dissemination, as a marker for male versus female representation in speakership for continuing specialty education.
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.