Medical Podcasting and Circulation on the Run
Why, How, and What Now
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
The potential for digital communication to transform medical education and practice is well recognized.1 A recent systematic review on the use of social media in graduate medical education2 showed that podcasts, along with Twitter and blogs, were the most frequently used platforms for the dissemination of evidence-based medicine and sharing clinical teaching points. Medical audiences most often use podcasts as a means to review information when they want, where they want, and how they want,1 be it on the move or on the couch, on handhelds or laptops, on demand or command, thus perfectly suiting the busy clinician’s lifestyle. As a result, medical podcasts have burgeoned, be they institution-, publisher-, or journal-based. Despite the great potential to enhance scientific dissemination via podcasts, a critical review of medical podcasts in 2009 revealed that uptake was limited, and the delivery and quality of the listening experience were variable.3 Reviewed podcasts exhibited suboptimal technical standards (variation in sound levels and background echo or hiss). Interview formats were easier to engage with, whereas podcasts that involved solemn intonation of articles or detailed incantation of results were difficult to follow.3 Fortunately these identified factors are modifiable and, coupled with emerging data on …