Official podcast series from The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions (JCEHP).
JCEHP Emerging Best Practices in CPD
Claim This Podcastby Brian McGowan
5.0(6 reviews)
24 episodes
Updated Bi-weekly
Accepts GuestsHas Sponsors
18
Podcast Authority
BetaPoorBased on show quality, social media presence, reviews, charts, and more
Quality12
Social0
YouTube0
Engagement60
Podcast Overview
Official podcast series from The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions (JCEHP).
Language
🇺🇲
Publishing Since
6/8/2023
Unlock The Full Podcast Authority Score Report
See how your podcast performs across key metrics
18
Podcast Authority
BetaPoorBased on show quality, social media presence, reviews, charts, and more
Quality12
Social0
YouTube0
Engagement60
4
Excellent Areas
2
Good Performance
13
Growth Opportunities
excellent
Episode Length
45 minutes
Performing excellently!
good
Show Notes Quality
3.0/5
Recommendations available
Unlock the full report to see detailed tips
poor
Publishing Consistency
Every 38 days
Recommendations available
Unlock the full report to see detailed tips
+16 More Metrics
Unlock comprehensive insights including:
- • YouTube presence analysis
- • Social media reach metrics
- • RSS compliance scoring
- • Podcast 2.0 features
- • Technical standards
What's Included in Your Full Report
Detailed Analytics
- Complete breakdown of all 19 authority metrics
- Personalized recommendations for each metric
- Industry benchmarks and comparisons
- Technical RSS feed analysis and compliance scoring
Growth Strategies
- Step-by-step action plans for improvement
- Quick wins to boost your score immediately
- Pro tips from successful podcasters
Get your free podcast insights report
See how your show performs across every key metric
Instant delivery
No spam
Attract Better Guests
High authority scores make your podcast more attractive to industry leaders and influencers who want to appear on credible shows.
Secure Sponsorships
Sponsors look for podcasts with proven authority and engagement. Your score demonstrates your podcast's value to potential partners.
Grow Your Audience
Understanding your strengths and weaknesses helps you make data-driven decisions to expand your listener base effectively.
2 verified contact emails on file for JCEHP Emerging Best Practices in CPD
Pitch yourself as a guest, propose sponsorships, or reach out directly to the host.
Recent Episodes
June 11, 2026
From Theory to Practice: Evaluating the Integration of Adult Learning Theory in Continuing Medical Education Activities
<p>The underpinnings of adult learning theory are foundational to continuing medical education (CME). Several widely studied learning theories are relevant to medical providers including deliberate practice, situated learning theory and community of practice, social cognitive theory and self-determination, adaptive expertise, and experiential learning theory. The Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education recognizes 11 types of CME activities each integrating these learning theories to some degree. Provider preferences are shaped by accessibility, cost, flexibility, and opportunities for networking leaving many balancing the convenience of online programs with the value of in-person interactions. The degree to which learning theories are integrated within CME activities is widely understudied despite their interwoven relationship and association to provider preferences. This analysis aims to (1) evaluate the degree various CME models integrate learning theory; (2) identify theory-led strengths and limitations of CME models; and (3) extrapolate themes for CME planners to strengthen theory integration. The three most common types of CME activities are enduring material (ie, web-based courses, web-based courses with simulation), live courses (ie, conferences, webinars, simulations), and regular scheduled series (ie, Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes, speaker series). Integration of learning theory across 7 CME models was evaluated through a content analysis using a trichotomous classification system (fully integrated, partially integrated, or no integration). Results varied, with Project Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes and live simulations having the highest degree of theory integration. A thematic analysis identified five themes for improving theory integration including feedback mechanisms, structured self-reflection, adaptability to promote autonomy, repeat exposure to complex skills, and practice of humility.</p> <p><a href= "https://journals.lww.com/jcehp/fulltext/2026/03000/from_theory_to_practice__evaluating_the.7.aspx"> Access the article here</a>.</p>
November 26, 2025
Measuring Scholarly Practice in Respiratory Therapists: The Development and Initial Validation of a Scholarly Practice Tool
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12.0pt 0in 12.0pt 0in;"> <span lang="EN" style= "font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS';" xml:lang="EN">Introduction: Respiratory therapists (RTs) must apply competencies to address the health care needs of the public. Although all competencies are deemed essential, scholarly practice requires that professionals critically assess their practices, integrate evidence-based literature, and enhance the care they deliver to patients. Though scholarly practice is also associated with professional empowerment, role satisfaction, and improved patient care, it is rarely measured. The purpose of this study was to develop, pilot, and generate preliminary validity evidence of a tool designed to measure scholarly practice among RTs. Methods: We used DeVellis' nine-step scale development process and exploratory factor analysis to develop the tool. The results of a scoping review and qualitative study were used to generate an item pool and pilot test it with 81 RTs across Canada. The refined tool was tested on a larger sample (n = 832) and analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. Results: Using principal axis factoring with Promax rotation, we retained 18 items across 4 factors, explaining 56.7% of the variance in the data: (Factor 1) professional development and credibility, (Factor 2) elements supporting scholarly practice, (Factor 3) the perceived impact of scholarly activities on practice, and (Factor 4) scholarly practitioner identity and ability. Internal consistency of the final 18-item scale was suitable overall. Discussion: Our results provide preliminary evidence for a scholarly practice tool that can encourage self-reflection and/or foster peer-based reflection. Using the tool with other health care professionals and conducting confirmatory factor analysis could generate additional validity evidence.</span></p> <p><span lang="EN" style= "font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" xml:lang="EN"><a href= "https://journals.lww.com/jcehp/fulltext/2025/00000/measuring_scholarly_practice_in_respiratory.2.aspx"> <span style= "font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; color: #1155cc;"> Access the article here</span></a></span><span lang="EN" style= "font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" xml:lang="EN">.</span></p>
October 6, 2025
Considering the Cost-Effectiveness of Accredited Continuing Medical Education: A Landscape Analysis of Economic Concepts in Continuing Medical Education Research
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 12.0pt 0in 12.0pt 0in;"> <span lang="EN" style= "font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS';" xml:lang="EN">In health care, cost-effectiveness analysis evaluates changes in health outcomes as a function of costs. The cost-effectiveness of continuing professional development for health care providers has not been historically well characterized despite substantial investment. This literature review identified publications considering the costs and cost-effectiveness of accredited continuing medical education activities. Searches were conducted for English language records in PubMed and the gray literature using a 10-year lookback period from March 10, 2023. Search terms included concepts related to continuing medical education, cost, effect, and utilization. One reviewer conducted title/abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction, with direction and adjudication of search and screening concepts provided by the lead advisor. Publications were categorized as related to costs of an educational intervention (Concept 1) and/or the impact of education on health care costs (Concept 2). Results were summarized using descriptive statistics. A total of 668 database records were screened, 125 (19%) underwent full-text review, and 25 of 125 (20%) were accepted; 7 of 351 (2%) gray literature sources were accepted for a total of 32 included records. The most common reason for rejection was not being an accredited activity. Of the 32 records, 27 (84%) were related to Concept 1 only, 3 (9%) to Concept 2 only, and 2 (6%) to both Concepts 1 and 2. Approximately half (n = 19, 59%) mentioned costs without supporting data. These findings show that considerations of cost and cost-effectiveness are rare in the accredited continuing medical education literature, which may limit how the value of continuing medical education is characterized.</span></p> <p><span lang="EN" style= "font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" xml:lang="EN"><a href= "https://journals.lww.com/jcehp/fulltext/2025/00000/considering_the_cost_effectiveness_of_accredited.5.aspx"> <span style= "font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; color: #1155cc;"> Access the article here</span></a></span><span lang="EN" style= "font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS',sans-serif; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" xml:lang="EN">.</span></p>
24 total episodes available
Deep-dive analytics for JCEHP Emerging Best Practices in CPD
Frequently asked questions
Have a different question and can't find the answer you're looking for? Reach out to our support team by sending us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as we can.
- What is JCEHP Emerging Best Practices in CPD?
- How often does this podcast release new episodes?
This podcast updates bi-weekly.
- Where can I listen to this podcast?
This podcast is available on 8 platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and more. You can also use the RSS feed directly.
- Does this podcast accept guests?
Information about guest appearances is not available.
Legal Disclaimer
Pod Engine is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or officially connected with any of the podcasts displayed on this platform. We operate independently as a podcast discovery and analytics service.
All podcast artwork, thumbnails, and content displayed on this page are the property of their respective owners and are protected by applicable copyright laws. This includes, but is not limited to, podcast cover art, episode artwork, show descriptions, episode titles, transcripts, audio snippets, and any other content originating from the podcast creators or their licensors.
We display this content under fair use principles and/or implied license for the purpose of podcast discovery, information, and commentary. We make no claim of ownership over any podcast content, artwork, or related materials shown on this platform. All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are the property of their respective owners.
While we strive to ensure all content usage is properly authorized, if you are a rights holder and believe your content is being used inappropriately or without proper authorization, please contact us immediately at hey@podengine.ai for prompt review and appropriate action, which may include content removal or proper attribution.
By accessing and using this platform, you acknowledge and agree to respect all applicable copyright laws and intellectual property rights of content owners. Any unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or commercial use of the content displayed on this platform is strictly prohibited.