Teaching prudent antibiotic use on the go: a descriptive report on development, utilization and listener satisfaction of an educational podcast format for medical students and young professionals [original]

RESEARCH Open Access

sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and

the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this

article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included

in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will

need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The

Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available

in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-024-01402-8 Antimicrobial Resistance &

Infection Control

*Correspondence:

Miriam Wiese-Posselt

miriam.wiese[email protected]

Full list of author information is available at the end of the article

Abstract

Background An important component in fostering the responsible use of antibiotics is training of new and future

prescribers in this interdisciplinary topic. Because podcasts are playing an increasing role in medical education, we

aimed to develop and evaluate a podcast format with practice and guideline-oriented learning content on antibiotic

therapy for medical students and young medical professionals.

Methods We developed the concept for the podcast with the direct involvement of medical students and medical

experts with teaching experience. We used video conferencing when recording the episodes in order to have quick,

easy, and nationwide access to the experts involved. We released an episode every 2 to 4 weeks on the popular

podcast platforms. The podcast was promoted through mailing lists, social and print media, and at conferences. The

evaluation of episodes was based on user data provided by the platforms and an anonymous feedback questionnaire

linked to each episode in the podcast notes.

Results Between December 2021 and December 2022 19 episodes of InfectEd: der Antibiotika-Podcast were released.

The mean duration of an episode was 91min. By March 9, 2023, a total of 38,829 downloads and streams had been

recorded. The majority of users listened to the podcast on a mobile device. The average playing time per episode

was 65%. The feedback questionnaire was completed 135 times. 60.7% of respondents were female, 38.5% male.

The majority of respondents were in their twenties and thirties (66.7%). 31.1% were medical students, 25.9% were

residents, and 25.2% were specialists. Listeners were asked to rate episodes on a scale from 1 to 6, where 1 was “very

good” and 6 was “insufficient.” Ratings did not differ significantly between female and male respondents or between

Teaching prudent antibiotic use on the

go: a descriptive report on development,

utilization and listener satisfaction of an

educational podcast format for medical

students and young professionals

SandraSchneider1,7, ClaraBergmann1, FeliciaBecker1, LukasRisse1, CarolineIsner2, HartmutStocker3,

Markus A.Feufel4, AlinaRöhrig4, OliverKurzai5, Thiên-TríLâm5, StefanHagel6, Mathias W.Pletz6, PetraGastmeier1 and

MiriamWiese-Posselt1*

Page 2 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

Background

Increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major

challenge in modern medicine, and the misuse and over-

use of antibiotics is an important driver in the develop-

ment of AMR [1]. Medical students as future prescribers

and young physicians as new prescribers should receive

in-depth training in responsible and guideline-adher-

ent antibiotic use. The InfectControl Project RAI stu-

dents (RAI = Responsible Antibiotic use via Information

and Communication, target group medical students)

addressed the question how modern learning concepts

can be designed to communicate the complex and inter-

disciplinary issues of antibiotic therapy to medical stu-

dents [2, 3].

The project has resulted in four digital teaching for-

mats, each free of charge, each addressing different

learning preferences and knowledge levels: (a) Explana-

tory films that provide short pieces of information; (b) a

structured online course (“massive open online course” =

MOOC) that teaches microbiological and pharmacologi-

cal basics and treatment principles; (c) interactive case

studies that serve to train practical knowledge; finally, (d)

the podcast format to teach concrete antibiotic therapy

decision-making based on a deep understanding of the

respective clinical picture and target-oriented diagnos-

tics. Hence, its primary addressees are advanced medical

students and young physicians.

Internationally, podcasts are already in wide use in

medical education [4–6]. A podcast format on infectious

diseases with six tutorial episodes was evaluated at the

University of London in 2011 and rated “excellent” by a

majority of the London medical students surveyed [7].

However, it is not easy to transfer learning content on

guideline-based antibiotic therapy internationally—in

particular because of regional differences in antibiotic

resistance and differences of national guidelines from

country to country. This implies a need for content that

is aligned to relevant national guidelines. Another chal-

lenge in developing an open-access learning format for

medical students and young physicians is to reach audi-

ences with widely varying levels of prior knowledge while

remaining clinically relevant.

This article aims to describe the user-centered devel-

opment of our German podcast format and to assess its

reception on the base of usage data and a voluntary feed-

back questionnaire.

Methods

Study design and research questions

The study was designed as a feasibility study with a prag-

matic approach. The question was how our podcast for-

mat on the practical use of antibiotics was received by the

target group in terms of acceptance, accessibility, utiliza-

tion, and satisfaction.

Conception

The actual concept development of the podcast was pre-

ceded by an analysis of the target group. This involved a

professional service provider (Point Blank – Research &

Consultancy GmbH, Berlin), which conducted interviews

with young physicians as well as focus group discussions

with medical students and lecturers from various fields.

We also conducted an online survey on knowledge, atti-

tudes, and behavior (KAB survey) regarding AMR and

antibiotic use as well as the learning preferences of medi-

cal students regarding access, format, and content [2, 3].

In this first project phase, which preceded this work,

we learned that in addition to gaps in knowledge regard-

ing the use of antibiotics, there is above all a lack of prac-

tical competence in the student population and among

young physicians, which results in a demand for strongly

practice-oriented knowledge transfer.

We also learned that the individual level of knowl-

edge and skills in dealing with antibiotics varies greatly

in these groups. The focus groups revealed that there are

few preferences in terms of format or medium as long as

the content is clinically relevant. In the end, we chose the

podcast format because in our opinion it enables quick

digital access to concrete practical knowledge, conveyed

by experts and peers in sufficient depth.

In addition to the preceding project phase, we incor-

porated the experience gained from a newly designed

Charité elective module for medical students on antibi-

otic therapy.

medical students and others. 118 respondents (87.4%) reported an increase in knowledge. Free-text feedback

frequently emphasized clinical and also exam relevance.

Conclusion Our podcast format, developed with a user-centered approach, was broadly distributed and has been

well accepted by both medical students and physicians alike. It provides a large number of learners with low-

threshold access to current, guideline-orientated content and could be a useful supplement to conventional teaching

formats.

Keywords Antibiotic stewardship, Antimicrobial stewardship, Medical education, FOAM, Antimicrobial resistance,

Podcast

Page 3 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

Medical students were then continuously involved in

the development of the podcast in order to get constant

feedback from the target group in the sense of participa-

tory design.

Development and production

Topics for podcast episodes were determined by the

RAI students study group based on previous clinical and

teaching experience. In addition, feedback from the lis-

teners was incorporated into the selection of topics for

later episodes.

Each podcast episode consisted of questions from two

medical students on a particular infectious disease topic

and the answers of a clinical expert. A physician from our

study group acted as moderator after an external mod-

eration training. The language of the podcast was Ger-

man. Each sequence was broadly structured in advance

in topic blocks such as the clinical picture, risk factors,

diagnostics, and therapy. Beyond that, there was no

script because we were striving for an authentic discus-

sion atmosphere. Each episode lasted between 1 and

2h. The recording sessions took place via video confer-

ence. Recording and post production were performed

by a professional producer (Karsten Kretzer, Kretzer TV,

Berlin). The cover was designed by a professional graphic

designer (Steffen Kalauch – Visuelle Kommunikation,

Berlin).

Distribution

The podcast’s Internet host was Podigee (www.podigee.

com), which published the episodes on its own plat-

form as well as on other popular podcast platforms,

such as Apple, Spotify, etc. Advertising was conducted

via email to student representatives and lecturers at all

German-speaking medical faculties and via the RAI

Twitter account [8]. A new episode was released every 2

to 4 weeks, always on the same day of the week. In addi-

tion, the podcast was linked in the RAI-students’ You-

Tube channel of explanatory films [9] and in the MOOC

[10]. In June 2022, the podcast was promoted on a gen-

eral German medical podcast with a broad distribution

[11]. In September 2022 the podcast was presented at the

annual meeting of the German Society for Hygiene and

Microbiology along with the other formats developed in

the RAI students project. Starting in September 2022,

stickers, flyers, and posters were distributed at various

scientific events.

Evaluation and analysis

To analyze utilization and accessibility we used standard

usage data collected by the provider platform Podigee

and Apple Podcast. To assess acceptance and satisfaction

we used a voluntary 9-item feed back questionnaire with

closed and open questions.

Data on downloads and streams (D&S) and listen-

ers were made available in aggregated form by Podigee.

According to Podigee, listeners were identified by IP

address and user agent. D&S raw data was cleaned up by

a 5-step filtering and interpretation process prior to data

transmission. Only D&S which lasted at least 1min were

counted, and multiple D&S by the same listener within a

24-hour period were aggregated into a single D&S [12].

Since Podigee cannot access information on playing

time, this information was retrieved from Apple Podcasts

Connect for the users of the Apple Podcast platform. We

did not have access to this data for other platforms.

A voluntary anonymous feedback questionnaire was

linked in the show notes of each episode. Completing the

questionnaire was promoted in each podcast episode’s

outro. The sampling method followed a convenience

strategy. The 9-item questionnaire was programmed

using LimeSurvey software (including 3 open questions).

A complete list of questions can be found in Supplement

1.All data was extracted on March 9, 2023.

The data collected by the closed questions was ana-

lyzed descriptively using IBM SPSS. P-values were calcu-

lated by the two-sided Fisher’s Exact Test or Chi Square

test where appropriate. Tests were regarded as signifi-

cant for p ≤ 0.05. An orientating qualitative analysis of the

answers to the open questions was performed without

special software. Categories were created manually after

reading through the free text comments.

Results

Usage profiles

Between December 2021 and December 2022, a trailer,

19 episodes and one brief organizational information

message were released under the label InfectEd: der Anti-

biotika-Podcast [13]. By March 9, 2023, a total of 38,829

D&S had been registered. On average, each episode was

played 1859 times. Table1 shows the number of D&S by

episode. The podcast was most frequently accessed on

smartphones (86.0% of D&S). The most common plat-

forms used were Spotify (55.1% of D&S) and Apple Pod-

cast (28.7% of D&S). On the Apple Podcast platform, the

average episode playing time was 65% of the respective

episode length.

The number of podcast listeners (as defined by Podi-

gee) started at 50 after the release of the first episode in

December 2021 and peaked in November 2022 at 2749.

Even after the release of the last episode in December

2022, the number of listeners remained high in January

and February 23 (Fig.1).

Page 4 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

Description of the respondents to the feedback

questionnaire and podcast rating

The feedback questionnaire was completed a total of 135

times. For the number of questionnaires completed per

episode, see Table1.

60.7% of respondents were female. The majority of

respondents were in their twenties (40.0%) and thirties

(26.7%). 31.1% (n = 42) were medical students (Fig.2). Of

these, 17 were in semester 1 to 6 and 17 in semester 7

to 9 and 8 without semester indication(the ninth semes-

ter had the highest number of listeners). The following

study locations were indicated: Berlin, Bochum, Dresden,

Düsseldorf, Erlangen, Freiburg, Göttingen, Greifswald,

Heidelberg, Homburg-Saar, Jena, Kiel, Lübeck, Mainz,

Munich, Nuremberg, Tübingen, Würzburg, and Vienna.

This accounts for about half of all the public medical

schools in Germany together with an Austrian university.

For further information on the non-medical students, see

Fig.2. For full description of respondent characteristics,

refer to supplement 1.

Figure3 shows the quantitative rating of the podcast

episode.

On a scale from 1 to 6 (1 = very good; 6 = insufficient),

grade 1, the highest grade, was awarded by 79.3% of all

respondents. The average grade was 1.32. Grade assign-

ment did not differ significantly between female and male

respondents, or between medical students and others.

Table 1 Aired episodes of “InfectEd – der Antibiotika-Podcast”

Episode No. Topic Release date Duration (minutes) Downloads and

streams

Completed

Question-

naires

X Trailer 20-Dec-21 3 1027 xx

1 Community acquired pneumonia 21-Dec-21 95 5354 18

2Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia 4-Jan-22 93 3966 20

3C difficile infection 18-Jan-22 94 2531 9

4 Skin and soft tissue infections 1-Feb-22 100 2245 16

5 Infection prevention and hospital hygiene 15-Feb-23 108 1766 3

XX Organizational information 15-Mar-22 2 628 xx

6 Microbiological diagnostic 29-Mar-22 101 1985 6

7 Opportunistic infections in HIV 3-May-22 95 1394 2

8 Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis 31-May-22 72 1370 6

9 Tonsillitis and otitis media in childhood 21-Jun-22 103 1700 5

10 Invasive fungal infections 12-Jul-22 111 1520 8

11 Exacerbated COPD 26-Jul-22 68 1399 5

12 Pharmacological aspects of antibiotics 9-Aug-22 100 2000 9

13 One Health 23-Aug-22 73 1073 3

14 Endocarditis 6-Sep-22 78 1309 5

15a Urinary tract infections – diagnostic 20-Sep-22 74 1142 5

15b Urinary tract infections – therapy 21-Sep-22 50 1154

16 Hospital acquired pneumonia 18-Oct-22 87 1194 5

17 Sepsis 1-Nov-22 79 1303 6

18 Vaccination 15-Nov-22 123 1174 2

19 Tuberculosis 13-Dec-22 106 1596 2

Fig. 2 Composition of listeners who responded to the questionnaire

linked in the show notes of the podcast episodes; ns = not specified

Fig. 1 Number of podcast listeners over time

Page 5 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

It did differ by age group however (p = 0.01). Thus, the

group of 30 to 39-year-olds awarded the grade 1 most

frequently (86.1% of the age group).

A knowledge gain was reported by 87.4% of all respon-

dents. Medical students were significantly more likely to

report a gain than other respondents: 97.6% of students

but only 82.8% of other respondents reported a knowl-

edge gain (p = 0.02).

When asked if the length of an episode was appropri-

ate, 83.7% of all respondents answered “yes”. Medical

students were more likely to approve of the length of an

episode than other participants: 92.9% of students but

only 79.6% of other participants found episode length

appropriate (p = 0.08). For full description of quantitative

feedback refer to supplement 1.

Informal feedback

Regarding the open question fields in the questionnaire:

56.3% entered a comment in the free text field for posi-

tive feedback. An orientating qualitative analysis of the

praise texts identified 10 recurring categories: (1) gen-

eral praise for the format, e.g. “great podcast” or “very

good format” or “I am totally exited about the episodes”;

(2) praise for student participation, e.g. “good with the

students asking the questions” or “good concept: medical

students were there and asked important questions”; (3)

praise for the experts, e.g. “the lecturer explained every-

thing very well” or “top notch experts”; (4) praise for the

summaries by the host, e.g. “Moderator/physician sum-

maries, they really help!” or “interim conclusions of the

moderator – the best”;(5) praise for the structure, e.g.

“well structured” or “working through the clinical picture,

diagnostics and therapy in a structured way”; (6) empha-

sis on relevance for exams or didactic value, e.g. “interest-

ing supplement to regular teaching” or “great for learning”

or “incredibly helpful for everyday life and preparation

for my exam in microbiology”; (7) emphasis on clinical

relevance, e.g. “Pragmatic and practice-relevant content

for everyday clinical work.” or “Absolutely to be recom-

mended, even for experienced clinicians.”; (8) describing

the episode as motivational or the like, e.g. “Motivates me

to look at the guideline.” or “Learning is so much fun: )”;

(9) describing the episode as interesting, exciting or the

like, e.g. “very interesting” or “totally exciting and enter-

taining”; (10) describing the episode as informative or the

like, e.g. “very informative” or “Took a lot of notes for my

daily routine”. Most feedback addressed several of these

categories. Only a single response in the positive feed-

back field was actually a criticism. Figure4A shows the

number of comments broken down by category and level

of training. Table2 shows translations of selected original

comments.

26.7% of respondents entered comments in the free text

field for criticism or suggestions for areas for improve-

ment. An orientating qualitative analysis revealed that 6

of the 36 entries were actually further positive feedback.

The 30 remaining statements could be roughly assigned

to 7 categories: (1) a desire for more basic information,

e.g. “Repeat basic knowledge a little more” or “lead-in

to AB therapy too fast and section about AB too short, I

would have liked more repetition of the content”; (2) criti-

cism of the length of the episode or specific parts of the

Fig. 3 Rating of the podcast episodes by the questionnaire linked in the show notes: global rating on a scale from 1 to 6 (German school grades) with

1 = very good, 2 = good, 3 = satisfactory, 4 = sufficient, 5 = poor, 6 = insufficient; ns = not specified

Page 6 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

episode, e.g. „If it were a bit shorter, it would be easier to

listen to the whole thing in one sitting.” or “too long”; (3) a

desire for more structure, e.g. „A bit more structure some-

times wouldn’t hurt”; (4) a desire for written summaries,

e.g. “A summary or key aspects in the show-notes would

be the greatest!!!” or “Script of the episode, if possible?”;

(5) the findability of the podcast on the Internet, e.g. “you

can’t find it”; (6) criticism of specific statements made

during the episode, e.g. “Doubling the amount in the

directions for use as a recommended dose in general in the

case of sepsis is negligent in my opinion!!!”; (7) very specific

individual aspects, e.g. “I would be happy if every now and

then the work of the technical assistants were mentioned.”.

Overall, the criticism was relatively well-intended and

was usually given together with positive feedback. Only

3 comments expressed severe criticism, none of which

were from medical students. Figure4B shows the number

of comments made by category and level of training.

The frequency of qualitative feedback did not differ sig-

nificantly between women and men, age groups, or medi-

cal students and other respondents.

For full description of qualitative feedback see supple-

ment 1.

Discussion

In this article, we present the development and evalua-

tion of a German-language training podcast format con-

cerning prudent antibiotic therapy. To our knowledge,

there is only one podcast in the German-speaking world,

Antibiotic Stewardship [14] (with 5 episodes), that also

deals explicitly with this topic. Another German-lan-

guage format (Infektiopod [15]) also frequently deals with

antibiotic therapy as part of its infectious disease profile.

Unlike ours, the primary intended audience of both these

formats tends to be physicians who have been in clini-

cal practice for a longer period of time. Thus, our format

Table 2 Selected translations of original comments in the praise

text field. For the entirety of all free-text translations (praise and

criticism suggestions for improvement, see Supplement 1)

“Interesting supplement to regular teaching, the questions from the

student perspective are especially nice, those are the questions you ask

yourself too.”

“Super explained! What is otherwise dry and rather unpopular, is

worked up with so much care here that the interest is contagious!

I think it is especially good that in between things are summarized and

recapitulated.”

“I am totally excited about the episodes! I feel like I’m really learning an

insane amount by working through the clinical picture, diagnostics and

therapy in a structured way. Please keep up the good work! Learning is

so much fun: )”

“I have been working as a nephrology resident in Austria for 3 years

now and I learn lots of new things from every episode. In some cases,

knowledge that was lost in clinical practice is revived, so that you can

improve the way of you work. I am generally a fan of medical podcasts,

unfortunately there are very few good ones from German-speaking

countries and medical practice is sometimes quite different from the

US. This podcast is definitely recommendable!”

“Really really great format in this episode!! I listened to the episode 2

times and even took notes the second time. So much information in

one podcast! Really great - thank you and keep up the good work!! :)”

“Very detailed, great effort to provide background information and

evidence for recommendations, repetition of key facts & recommenda-

tions for successful learning, top-notch experts”

Fig. 4 Theme clusters of the text fields for praise and criticism/ suggestions for improvement in the questionnaire linked in the each podcast episode’s

show notes. (See main text for details on the cluster categories)

Page 7 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

InfectEd - der Antibiotika-Podcast is unique in the Ger-

man-speaking world.

User data from podcasts should be interpreted with

caution since conclusions about individual listeners

based on D&S, IP address and user agent are imprecise,

and little can be said about listening behavior of users.

Caution must also be exercised when comparing user fig-

ures from different platforms, since they might utilize dif-

ferent counting criteria. Nevertheless, routinely collected

data provides some clues. We can see that it took some

time for our format to achieve a certain level of aware-

ness, but once it did it remained relatively stable from

June 2022 onward with more than 2000 estimated listen-

ers per month. The podcast was still being listened to in

high numbers during the 2 months after the last episode

was released. An interesting bit of additional information

is the playing time data from the Apple platform (Apple

Podcasts Connect), which shows that the average listen-

ing time is high. We didn’t have the playing time data for

other platforms, but Apple Podcast accounts for nearly

one-third of our D&S. This leads us to assume that users

maintain interest during podcast episodes.

The feedback questionnaire was completed by only a

few in relation to the total estimated number of listen-

ers. This may be partially due to the fact that filling in

the questionnaire on a mobile phone—which served as

the medium for most listeners—can be somewhat long

and tedious. Nonetheless, we received 135 responses

that can be evaluated. It should be noted that the num-

ber of discrete individuals may be lower since some lis-

teners probably rated several episodes. The results are

therefore not to be regarded as representative but rather

as orientational. Nevertheless, they provide interesting

insights: Most respondents were from the medical field

and a few were from related professions. Thus, taken as a

group, the respondents correspond to our intended audi-

ence. In addition to the primary target group of medical

students and young physicians (residents), it is notewor-

thy how many medical specialists responded. And even

though more medical students than physicians reported

an increase in knowledge, the general assessment of the

format did not differ between the groups. This suggests

that a format involving medical students and experts can

appeal to a medical audience with a wide range of prior

knowledge. However, it should be added that the few

very critical comments made in the free-text fields came

mainly from specialists and nonmedical respondents

(data link of individual citations and professional status

not shown). Although this does not comprise a great deal

of feedback overall, it suggests that the format may, after

all, be best suited for the primary intended audience of

medical students and young residents.

An important goal of our concept was to combine basic

understanding with a high degree of clinical relevance.

But the contents taught should also have relevance for

medical school exams. Therefore, it was encouraging

that we received praise in the free texts for clinical rel-

evance 18 times including comments from specialists

and 9 times for exam relevance/didactic value, while at

the same time a desire for more basic information was

expressed only 4 times.

Podcasts are assuming an increasing role in medicine

and science around the world. Some authors predict

that an important place in medical education for them

is inevitable [16]. There are many different podcast for-

mats to choose from, just as in non-medical podcasts:

informal conversations, didactically scripted episodes,

expert interviews, literature reviews, storytelling, case

histories, etc [17]. . . We opted for a more informal con-

cept in which medical students interviewed a designated

expert. We usually focused on one specific bacteriologi-

cal condition per episode, its causes, diagnosis, differen-

tial diagnoses, and therapy. Some structure was added by

the moderator. This format had the following advantages:

the content became very practice-oriented. The student

audience was represented by peers and if something was

not understood, they could ask questions about it. Deter-

mining subtopics in advance along with the degree of

clinical and didactic experience on the part of the experts

allowed us to discuss all essential aspects of the respec-

tive topic although no script was used. Remote record-

ing enabled experts nationwide to take part despite their

tight schedules. The conversational atmosphere helped

teach not only medical content but also soft skills and

attitudes.

One disadvantage of the format was the length of epi-

sodes. While there are no studies that proof an optimal

episode length, there is some evidence that episodes

under 20min in length are preferred [17, 18]. Our epi-

sodes lasted 60 to 120min. The playing time data and the

83.7% agreement that the length was appropriate suggest

that the high information content in our format favored

the podcasts’ length. This shows that episode length is

only one of many criteria and that there is no “single rec-

ipe” for a successful medical podcast. When answering

the closed question, physicians found the episodes too

long more often than medical students. The length was

also the most frequently mentioned point of criticism in

the free texts (14 mentions altogether but only 2 by medi-

cal students). In some cases, specific suggestions were

made for shorter intros or rounds of introductions, so

that time savings could be made there. A supplementary

written summary was requested several times. This could

be a good addition to long podcast episodes.

One advantage of the RAI students project [3] is cer-

tainly that the podcast fits into complementary e-learn-

ing formats, so that by combining formats different

learning types and learning qualities can be addressed.

Page 8 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

This corresponds to the call from experts in medical edu-

cation for an adaptive curriculum that allows for individ-

ualized learning strategies [19].

The following limitations of our descriptive report

should be taken into account:

• An analysis of user data based on downloads and

streams can only provide a rough estimate of the

number of listeners and no insight into individual

listening behavior. Information on listening time is

only available for Apple Podcast users.

• Due to the open distribution of the podcast on

all common platforms, there is no clearly defined

study group and the sampling of the feedback

questionnaire did not follow a structured sampling

design, but rather a pragmatic approach.

• It can be assumed that there is a sampling

bias and that listeners who found the podcast

particularly good or particularly bad responded. No

generalization can be made for the entire audience.

• The same listeners may have completed several

feedback forms for different episodes, so that the

number of respondents is lower than the number of

questionnaires.

• Our findings can provide an orienting insight into

the reception of our podcast format. However, it is

not possible to make a quantitative statement about

how many students and young professionals would

use this format instead of or in addition to other

formats.

• We did not investigate whether our podcast had a

learning effect on listeners. It was only possible to

describe individual statements that the episodes were

perceived as informative and were sometimes used

for exam preparation.

Despite these limitations, we think that our findings can

encourage other (university) teachers to consider a pod-

cast format as a supplementary teaching tool, preferably

with the involvement of students.

Further didactic knowledge could be gained in future

studies by creating laboratory conditions. For example,

podcast formats with and without student participation

or shorter versus longer episodes could be tested with

regard to learning success.

Conclusions

Our medical podcast format that focuses on bacterial

diseases and antibiotic therapy has attracted widespread

interest in the professional medical community in Ger-

many, from medical students to specialists. Involving

students in the expert interview format also makes it

possible to address basic questions. This gives students

the feeling that they are represented. Advanced listeners

are confronted again with questions they might not ask

themselves during their everyday routine. The format

provides a large number of learners with low-threshold

access to current, guideline-compliant content delivered

by high-profile, national experts from a respective area.

This knowledge can be picked up while tending to other

activities (on the way to work, while doing housework,

while exercising). Compared to monologue teaching for-

mats, a podcast dialogue can explore a clinical topic from

diverse perspectives. Taken together, a good podcast for-

mat can be a useful supplement to textbooks, commercial

platforms, and the local university curriculum.

Abbreviations

AMR antimicrobial resistance

D&S downloads and streams

KAB knowledge, attitudes and behavior

MOOC massive open online course

n count

No. sequential number

Ns not specified

RAI responsible antibiotic use via information and communication

(project name)

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.

org/10.1186/s13756-024-01402-8.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary Material 2

Acknowledgements

Our thanks to all contributing experts: Stephan Achterberg (Clinical Pharmacy,

Vivantes Berlin); Torsten Bauer (Pneumology, Helios Klinikum Emil von Behring

Berlin); Christian Eckmann (General Surgery, Klinikum Hannoversch Münden);

Andrea Erbguth (Clinical Pharmacy, Vivantes Berlin); Christine Geffers (Infection

Prevention, Charité Berlin); Matthias Gründling (Anesthesiology and Intensive

Care, University Hospital Greifswald); Stefan Hagel (Infectious Diseases &

Infection Prevention, University Hospital Jena); Brit Häcker (German Central

Committee for the Combat against Tuberculosis); Caroline Isner (Infectious

Diseases, Vivantes Berlin); Tobias Kramer (Microbiology & Infection Prevention,

LADR Laboratory Network Dr. Kramer & Collegues); Uta Kunter (Nephrology,

University Hospital Aachen); Oliver Kurzai (Microbiology, University Hospital

Würzburg); Kathrin Labahn (Infection Prevention, Charité Berlin); Marie von

Lilienfeld-Toal (Hematology/Oncology, University Hospital Jena); Ralf Otto-

Knapp (German Central Committee for the Combat against Tuberculosis);

Mathias W.Pletz (Pneumology, Infectious Diseases & Infection Prevention,

University Hospital Jena); Uwe Rösler (Animal Hygiene & Infectious Diseases,

Veterinary Department, FU Berlin); Hartmut Stocker (Infectious Diseases,

St. Joseph Krankenhaus Berlin); Roland Tillmann (Outpatient Pediactrics,

Bielefeld); Miriam Wiese-Posselt (Infection Prevention, Charité Berlin). Our

thanks to all contributing medical students: Felicia Becker, Clara Bergmann,

Katharina Ginter, Andreas Kogler, Lukas Risse, Cheyenne Sonnenschein (all

Charité, Berlin). Our thanks to Karsten Kretzer for the moderation training and

the technical podcast production. We thank Steffen Kalauch for the cover

design and the design contribution to advertising. Our thanks to Marius Wiese

for the title music. Our thanks to Alexander Gropmann, Charlotte Roschka

and Dana Polch from the IT team of the Institute of Hygiene, Charité Berlin for

the survey programming. Our thanks to Gerald Brennan for proofreading the

manuscript. www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) was used as translation

aid.

Page 9 of 9Schneider et al. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control (2024) 13:50

Author contributions

SS, MF, AR, OK, TL, PG, MW developed the initial idea and the overall concept

for the Podcast project. SS, CB, FB, LR, CI, HS, SH, MP elaborated the structure

of episodes. SS, CI, HS, OK, SH, MP, PG, MW selected the main topics for the

episodes. SS, CI, OK and PG recruited the experts. SS moderated the podcast.

SS and MW created and designed the evaluation questionnaire. SS, CB, FB,

PG, MW organized the advertising. SS, MW organized the Podcast distribution

and the data collection. SS compiled the user data provided externally and

analyzed the survey data. SS, PG, MW evaluated the results. SS wrote the draft

manuscript. PG, MW revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to the

final version of the manuscript.

Funding

The RAI students project was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and

Research as part of the consortium InfectControl (funding sign 03ZZ0837). The

funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, the decision

to publish, or the preparation of the manuscript.

Data availability

Regarding D&S as well as playing time, we used the aggregate data routinely

provided to podcast publishers by Podigee and Apple. These are transmitted

continuously. Screenshots from the time point of analysis are provided in the

supplement (Supplement 2). Raw data was not available to us at any time.

Regarding the feedback questionnaire data a full description of all answers is

provided in the supplement (Supplement 1). The raw dataset is available from

the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable for this fully anonymous user data analysis. The online feedback

questionnaire was conducted in accordance with current guidelines and

regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Author details

1Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Charité –

Universitätsmedizin Berlin corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin,

Humboldt- Universität zu Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 27, Berlin

12203, Germany

2Klinik für Innere Medizin-Infektiologie, Vivantes Auguste-Viktoria-

Klinikum, Rubensstr. 125, Berlin 12157, Germany

3Department of Infectious Diseases, St. Joseph Hospital, Berlin-Tempelhof,

Wüsthoffstr. 15, Berlin 12101, Germany

4Department of Psychology and Ergonomics (IPA), Division of

Ergonomics, Technische Universität Berlin, Marchstr. 23, Berlin

10587, Germany

5Institute for Hygiene and Microbiology, University of Würzburg, Josef-

Schneider-Str. 2, Würzburg 97080, Germany

6Institute for Infectious Diseases and Infection Control, Jena University

Hospital, Am Klinikum 1, Jena 07747, Germany

7Helios Klinikum Emil-von-Behring, Walterhöfer Str. 11, Berlin

14165, Germany

Received: 19 October 2023 / Accepted: 24 April 2024

References

1. Holmes AH, Moore LS, Sundsfjord A, Steinbakk M, Regmi S, Karkey A et al.

Understanding the mechanisms and drivers of antimicrobial resistance.

Lancet. 2015.

2. Wiese-Posselt M, Lam TT, Schroder C, Schneider S, Kurzai O, Feufel MA, et al.

Appropriate antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance: knowledge, attitudes

and behaviour of medical students and their needs and preferences for

learning. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2023;12(1):48.

3. Rationaler Antibiotikaeinsatz durch Information. und Kommunikation:

students 2019 [ https://www.rai-projekt.de/students.

4. Kelly JM, Perseghin A, Dow AW, Trivedi SP, Rodman A, Berk J. Learning

through listening: a scoping review of Podcast Use in Medical Education.

Acad Med. 2022;97(7):1079–85.

5. Little A, Hampton Z, Gronowski T, Meyer C, Kalnow A. Podcasting in Medicine:

a review of the current content by Specialty. Cureus. 2020;12(1):e6726.

6. Lomayesva NL, Martin AS, Dowley PA, Davies NW, Olyha SJ, Wijesekera

TP. Five Medical Education Podcasts you need to know. Yale J Biol Med.

2020;93(3):461–6.

7. Shetty N, Bin Reza F, Tomkinson P. Infectious diseases teaching for medical

students: do podcasts work? Med Teach. 2011;33(7):593.

8. @rai_projekt. 2020 [Available from: https://twitter.com/rai_projekt.

9. RAI Project - YouTube. Channel 2021 [ https://www.youtube.com/@

RAIProjekt.

10. Basis-Antibiotikaführerschein für Studierende der Humanmedizin mooc.

house2022 [ https://mooc.house/courses/rai-students-02.

11. Klinisch R. [ https://klinisch-relevant.de/.

12. Unified Podcast Analytics – ein Podigee-. Whitepaper 2019 [ https://docs.

google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vQQcfYvUUsaR2UBPudmCpe5y-

NDs5HczB2ST9M6jEBwl3eHZyn5TcFX_HiEVSBE9y7yTBdZzF8HbRDdn/

pub.

13. Schneider S, Pletz M, Kurzai O, Wiese-Posselt M, Gastmeier P. InfectEd - der

Antibiotika-Podcast Podigee: Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; 2021 [

https://rai-infected.podigee.io/.

14. Antibiotic Stewardship-Podcast. St. Franziskus-Hospital Münster 2021 [

https://www.sfh-muenster.de/antibioticstewardship-podcast-1/.

15. Koch TH, Terhalle A, Pape E. D. Infektiopod - Ein Podcast über Infektionsmed-

izin 2019 [ https://infektiopod.de/.

16. Berk J, Trivedi SP, Watto M, Williams P, Centor R. Medical Education

podcasts: where we are and questions unanswered. J Gen Intern Med.

2020;35(7):2176–8.

17. Berk J, Watto M, Williams P. Twelve tips for creating a medical education

podcast. Med Teach. 2020;42(11):1221–7.

18. Cosimini MJ, Cho D, Liley F, Espinoza J. Podcasting in Medical Education: how

long should an Educational Podcast be? J Grad Med Educ. 2017;9(3):388–9.

19. Harden RM. Ten key features of the future medical school-not an impossible

dream. Med Teach. 2018;40(10):1010–5.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in

published maps and institutional affiliations.