Characteristics of oncology podcasts: Attitudes, speakers, conflicts

Akman, Emma Greenstreet; Powell, Kerrington; Haslam, Alyson; Prasad, Vinay

doi:10.1016/j.jcpo.2022.100329

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the credibility domain of the included trauma podcast episodes was not rated up to par, specifically in the context of nondisclosure of conflicts of interest. This finding is congruent with findings reported by Akman et al, in which most physicians featured in oncology podcasts did not disclose their financial conflicts of interest.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quality of Trauma Surgery Podcasts in Credibility, Content, and Design

Merchant,

Shah,

Khursheed

et al. 2024

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceThere has been an emerging trend of podcast use in medical education over the past decade. With the increasing number of podcasts and learners’ interest in trauma surgery, it is vital to validate the quality of these podcasts.ObjectiveTo determine the quantity and quality of podcast episodes on trauma surgery.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study identified trauma surgery podcasts published globally on the Google, Apple, and Spotify platforms as of May 31, 2023. An initial screening excluded podcasts not fulfilling the inclusion criteria (published as of May 31, 2023, and covering clinical knowledge or mentorship on general trauma surgery). A 10-item checklist developed from a modified Delphi consensus method was created to assess the podcasts’ credibility, content, and design as indicators of quality. Data extracted from each podcast episode included the duration, setting, host and guest credentials, and fulfillment of quality indicators. Data were analyzed on August 13, 2023.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe quality of each podcast was assessed using the 10-question checklist. A score of at least 80% in credibility (4 of 5 points), 75% in content (3 of 4 points), and 100% in design (1 of 1 point) was required to classify a podcast episode as having good quality.ResultsThe initial search identified 204 podcasts on trauma surgery, of which 55 podcasts met the inclusion criteria. All 55 podcasts were published after 2014, with the majority hosted by males (85% [61 of 72 hosts]), based in the US (91% [50 of 55 podcasts]), and focused on clinical knowledge (80% [44 of 55 podcasts]). Podcast hosts and guests predominantly held a Doctor of Medicine degree (83% [113 of 136]), with 72% [46 of 64] of guests identifying as practicing trauma surgeons. While all 55 podcasts had excellent quality in terms of content and design, 20% (11 of 55) of podcasts were rated poorly on credibility. Credibility was further reduced for 60% (33 of 55) of podcasts because of nondisclosure of conflicts of interest.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study of trauma surgery podcasts, most had good-quality content and design, but there was a lack of explicit conflict of interest disclosure. Content producers need to disclose their conflicts of interest appropriately to ensure credibility and improve the quality of their podcasts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…This finding is congruent with findings reported by Akman et al, 17 in which most physicians featured in oncology podcasts did not disclose their financial conflicts of interest.…”

Section: Jama Network Open | Medical Educationsupporting

confidence: 92%

Quality of Trauma Surgery Podcasts in Credibility, Content, and Design

Merchant,

Shah,

Khursheed

et al. 2024

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Study and author funding can lead to conflicts of interest, which can also lead to bias in study conclusions. 4 , 8 , 9 Second, we found that studies with medical writers were more likely to have the end point of PFS, while studies without medical writers were more likely to have the end point of OS. These findings suggest that medical writers are recruited for trials that focus on end points of lesser importance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Frequency and Characteristics of Trials Using Medical Writer Support in High-Impact Oncology Journals

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceThe practice of using medical writers to communicate scientific information has gained popularity, but it may affect how and what information is communicated.ObjectiveTo assess characteristics of oncology trials that use medical writers and whether there is an association between the use of medical writers and trial success or the primary outcome evaluated.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study included oncology trials testing a tumor-targeting intervention that were published in The Lancet, The Lancet Oncology, JAMA, JAMA Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, and The New England Journal of Medicine between May 1, 2021, and May 1, 2022.ExposuresAssistance of medical writers or no assistance.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcomes were the percentage of studies with medical writers, the percentage of trial successes reported with medical writers, the association between trial success and medical writer use, and the association between a primary end point and medical writer use.ResultsAmong 270 studies, 141 (52.2%) included a medical writer and 129 (47.8%) did not include a medical writer. Of the studies that included a medical writer, 83 (58.9%) were successful. Of the studies that did not include a medical writer, 64 (49.6%) were successful (P = .16 for difference). Studies with medical writers were less likely than studies without medical writers to have the end point of overall survival (15 [10.6%] vs 17 [13.2%]) and disease-free or event-free survival (16 [11.3%] vs 29 [22.5%]), whereas studies with a medical writer were more likely to have the end point of progression-free survival (32 [22.7%] vs 17 [13.2%]). Use of medical writer was associated with the conclusions being presented favorably in all studies (113 [80.1%] vs 89 [69.0%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.04-3.19]), but when adjusted for other variables, there was no association (OR, 1.84 [95% CI, 0.92-3.72]).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study, trials using medical writers were more likely to report surrogate end points, such as progression-free survival, and favorable conclusions, but when adjusted for trial phase, randomization, and study funding, there was no association with favorable conclusions. These findings suggest that journals need heightened scrutiny for studies with medical writers and that authorship should be properly acknowledged.

show abstract

“…Social media platforms offer a unique space to research the effects of FCOIs since users may participate in medical discourse with broad audiences, ranging from the individual level (e.g., the lay public, medical experts) to groups (e.g., medical journals, academic organisations). The influence of FCOIs on social media material is not negligible, as its potential consequences have been widely established in other medical specialties such as haematology‐oncology 4–7 . FCOIs are a potential barrier to delivering the best possible patient care because of recognised associations with clinical practice guidelines, scholarly performance, prescription patterns, and medical research outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The influence of FCOIs on social media material is not negligible, as its potential consequences have been widely established in other medical specialties such as haematology-oncology. [4][5][6][7] FCOIs are a potential barrier to delivering the best possible patient care because of recognised associations with clinical practice guidelines, scholarly performance, prescription patterns, and medical research outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial conflicts of interest of physicians followed by neurosurgical journals on Twitter

Powell

McCall

Hooda

et al. 2023

Health Planning & Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Social media, particularly Twitter, has played an increasing role in networking and the dissemination of neurosurgical research. Despite extensive study on financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) influencing medical research, little is known about the function of conflicts of interest on social media and the influence they may have. In this study, we sought to evaluate the FCOI of physicians followed on Twitter by the top three neurosurgical journals. Materials and Methods: We analysed the FCOI of United States (US) physicians followed by the top three neurosurgical journals (Journal of Neurosurgery, World Neurosurgery, Neurosurgery) on Twitter. We determined the FCOIs of each physician using the Open Payments Search Tool located at https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov and summed the data between 2014 and 2021. Results: We examined 2651 Twitter accounts followed by the top three neurosurgical journals on Twitter and determined 705 (26.6%) belonged to US physicians. Of the 705 US physicians, 577 (81.8%) received general payments between 2014 and 2021. After excluding US physicians currently in residency or fellowship (n = 157), this percentage increased to 93.2% (n = 511/548). In total, nearly $70 million in general payments were made between 2014 and 2021. Conclusion: These findings raise questions regarding the interaction between neurosurgical journals and the medical community on Twitter. This study may serve as the basis for

show abstract

Characteristics of oncology podcasts: Attitudes, speakers, conflicts

Cited by 8 publications

References 15 publications

Quality of Trauma Surgery Podcasts in Credibility, Content, and Design

Quality of Trauma Surgery Podcasts in Credibility, Content, and Design

Frequency and Characteristics of Trials Using Medical Writer Support in High-Impact Oncology Journals

Financial conflicts of interest of physicians followed by neurosurgical journals on Twitter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About