Teams are the building blocks of the healthcare system, with growing evidence linking the quality of health care to team effectiveness, and team effectiveness to team training. Simulation has been identified as an effective modality for team training and assessment. Despite this, there are gaps in methodology, measurement, and implementation that prevent maximizing the impact of simulation modalities on team performance. As part of the 2017 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference "Catalyzing System Change through Health Care Simulation: Systems, Competency, and Outcomes," we explored the impact of simulation on various aspects of team effectiveness. The consensus process included an extensive literature review, group discussions, and the conference "work-shop" involving emergency medicine physicians, medical educators, and team science experts. The objectives of this work are to: (1) explore the antecedents and processes that support team effectiveness, (2) summarize the current role of simulation in developing and understanding team effectiveness, and (3) identify research targets to further improve team-based training and assessment, with the ultimate goal of improving health care systems. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,421,145
of 34,208,280 outputs
Outputs from Academic Emergency Medicine
#335
of 4,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,565
of 358,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Emergency Medicine
#13
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,208,280 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 358,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
