How podcasts teach: A comprehensive analysis of the didactic methods of the top hundred medical podcasts.
Saved in:
| Title: | How podcasts teach: A comprehensive analysis of the didactic methods of the top hundred medical podcasts. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Zhang, Ellen1, Trad, Nicolas1, Corty, Robert2, Zohrob, Dave3, Trivedi, Shreya1,4,5, Rodman, Adam1,4,5 |
| Source: | Medical Teacher. Oct2022, Vol. 44 Issue 10, p1146-1150. 5p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Online education, *Curriculum, *Conflict of interests, *Medical education, *Algorithms, Videoconferencing, Mann Whitney U Test, Quality control, Descriptive statistics, Chi-squared test, Data analysis software |
| Geographic Terms: | United States |
| Abstract: | Medical podcasts have grown in popularity, but little is known about their didactic methods. This study sought to systemically describe the pedagogical approach employed by the 100 most popular medical podcasts in the United States. This study also aimed to assess factors related to quality control and conflicts of interest in podcasting. The authors averaged the rank positions for Apple podcasts in the Medicine category in the United States from 06/01/18 to 09/30/20 to generate a list of the 100 highest-ranked medical podcasts. They developed and validated a categorization system of didactic methods based on Bloom's taxonomy and collected data on didactic methods, as well as podcast affiliation, target audience, format, advertising, continuing medical education (CME) offerings, and presence of a reference list or review process. Of the 100 most popular medical podcasts, 91 are educational. Of those, 51 are podcasts intended for physician education (PIPEs) while 40 are intended for other audiences, including the general public, nurses, and physical therapists. Compared with podcasts intended for other audiences, PIPEs engage higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy (p < 0.001). Among PIPEs, 18 (35.2%) are affiliated with an individual, 16 (31.4%) with a company, and 12 (23.5%) with a professional journal. 38 PIPEs (74.5%) are targeted toward all levels of medical learners. PIPEs are significantly more likely to list references or have a peer review process in place (n = 37, 72.5% vs. n = 15, 37.5%, p = 0.001) and offer CME credits (n = 20, 39.2% vs. n = 2, 5.0%, p < 0.001) than podcasts intended for other audiences. Medical podcasts employ a variety of didactic methods, including those ranked highly on Bloom's taxonomy. Unlike traditional medical education, PIPEs are commonly produced by individuals or companies and targeted to all levels of medical learners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Medical Teacher is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Medical podcasts have grown in popularity, but little is known about their didactic methods. This study sought to systemically describe the pedagogical approach employed by the 100 most popular medical podcasts in the United States. This study also aimed to assess factors related to quality control and conflicts of interest in podcasting. The authors averaged the rank positions for Apple podcasts in the Medicine category in the United States from 06/01/18 to 09/30/20 to generate a list of the 100 highest-ranked medical podcasts. They developed and validated a categorization system of didactic methods based on Bloom's taxonomy and collected data on didactic methods, as well as podcast affiliation, target audience, format, advertising, continuing medical education (CME) offerings, and presence of a reference list or review process. Of the 100 most popular medical podcasts, 91 are educational. Of those, 51 are podcasts intended for physician education (PIPEs) while 40 are intended for other audiences, including the general public, nurses, and physical therapists. Compared with podcasts intended for other audiences, PIPEs engage higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy (p < 0.001). Among PIPEs, 18 (35.2%) are affiliated with an individual, 16 (31.4%) with a company, and 12 (23.5%) with a professional journal. 38 PIPEs (74.5%) are targeted toward all levels of medical learners. PIPEs are significantly more likely to list references or have a peer review process in place (n = 37, 72.5% vs. n = 15, 37.5%, p = 0.001) and offer CME credits (n = 20, 39.2% vs. n = 2, 5.0%, p < 0.001) than podcasts intended for other audiences. Medical podcasts employ a variety of didactic methods, including those ranked highly on Bloom's taxonomy. Unlike traditional medical education, PIPEs are commonly produced by individuals or companies and targeted to all levels of medical learners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0142159X |
| DOI: | 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2071691 |
