Table 2.
Quantitative evaluation of GenAI-generated podcasts using a modified rMETRIQ score (n = 6: three medical education specialists and three general clinician-educators).
| Items and formats | S1 | S2 | S3 | Median (range) | C1 | C2 | C3 | Median (range) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Background | |||||||||
| Radio | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2.0 (2–2) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (3–3) | |
| Narrative | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2.0 (2–3) | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2.0 (2–3) | |
| Appropriate amount of information | |||||||||
| Radio | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3.0 (2–3) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (3–3) | |
| Narrative | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2.0 (2–3) | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3.0 (2–3) | |
| Well-produced | |||||||||
| Radio | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (3–3) | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2.0 (2–3) | |
| Narrative | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (2–3) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (2–3) | |
| Cites references | |||||||||
| Radio | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3.0 (2–3) | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3.0 (2–3) | |
| Narrative | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3.0 (2–3) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (2–3) | |
| Editorial process | |||||||||
| Radio | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1.0 (0–1) | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1.0 (1–3) | |
| Narrative | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 (1–1) | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1.0 (0–1) | |
| Utility | |||||||||
| Radio | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3.0 (2–3) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (3–3) | |
| Narrative | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2.0 (2–3) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3.0 (3–3) | |
| Interesting/engaging | |||||||||
| Radio | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2.0 (2–3) | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3.0 (2–3) | |
| Narrative | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3.0 (2–3) | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2.0 (2–3) | |
C: general clinician-educator; GenAI: generative artificial intelligence; rMETRIQ: Revised Medical Education Translational Resources: Impact and Quality; S: medical education specialist.