↓ Skip to main content

Within-Team Debriefing Versus Instructor-Led Debriefing for Simulation-Based Education

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgery, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
145 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
232 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Within-Team Debriefing Versus Instructor-Led Debriefing for Simulation-Based Education
Published in
Annals of Surgery, July 2013
DOI 10.1097/sla.0b013e31829659e4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sylvain Boet, M. Dylan Bould, Bharat Sharma, Scott Revees, Viren N. Naik, Emmanuel Triby, Teodor Grantcharov

Abstract

To compare the effectiveness of an interprofessional within-team debriefing with that of an instructor-led debriefing on team performance during a simulated crisis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 232 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 224 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 13%
Other 25 11%
Researcher 25 11%
Student > Postgraduate 24 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 9%
Other 67 29%
Unknown 38 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 115 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Social Sciences 14 6%
Psychology 6 3%
Computer Science 4 2%
Other 14 6%
Unknown 50 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 August 2017.
All research outputs
#4,102,121
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgery
#2,564
of 9,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,300
of 206,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgery
#22
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 206,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.