The use of podcasts as a tool to teach clinical reasoning: a pseudorandomized and controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: Podcasts have emerged as an efficient method for widespread delivery of educational clinical reasoning (CR) content. However, the impact of such podcasts on CR skills has not been established. We set out to determine whether exposure to expert reasoning in a podcast format leads to enhanced CR skills. METHODS: This is a pseudo-randomized study of third-year medical students (MS3) to either a control group (n=22) of pre-established online CR modules, or intervention group (n=26) with both the online modules and novel CR podcasts. The podcasts were developed from four "clinical unknown" cases presented to expert clinician educators. After completing these assignments in weeks 1-2, weekly history and physical (H&P) notes were collected and graded according to the validated IDEA rubric between weeks 3-7. A longitudinal regression model was used to compare the H&P IDEA scores over time. Usage and perception of the podcasts was also assessed via survey data. RESULTS: Ninety control and 128 intervention H&Ps were scored. There was no statistical difference in the change of average IDEA scores between intervention (0.92, p=0.35) and control groups (-0.33, p=0.83). Intervention participants positively received the podcasts and noted increased discussion of CR principles from both their ward (3.1 vs. 2.4, p=0.08) and teaching (3.2 vs. 2.5, p=0.05) attendings. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first objective, pseudo-randomized assessment of CR podcasts in undergraduate medical education. While we did not demonstrate significant improvement in IDEA scores, our data show that podcasts are a well-received tool that can prime learners to recognize CR principles.