↓ Skip to main content

Adaptation of the US Army’s After-Action Review for Simulation Debriefing in Healthcare

Overview of attention for article published in Simulation in Healthcare, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#33 of 837)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
Adaptation of the US Army’s After-Action Review for Simulation Debriefing in Healthcare
Published in
Simulation in Healthcare, December 2013
DOI 10.1097/sih.0b013e31829ac85c
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taylor Lee Sawyer, Shad Deering

Abstract

Postsimulation debriefing is a critical component of effective learning in simulation-based health care education. Numerous formats in which to conduct the debriefing have been proposed. In this report, we describe the adaptation the US Army's After-Action Review (AAR) debriefing format for postsimulation debriefing in health care. The Army's AAR format is based on sound educational theory and has been used with great success in the US Army and civilian organizations for decades. Debriefing using the health care simulation AAR process requires planning, preparation, and follow-up. Conducting a postsimulation debriefing using the health care simulation AAR debriefing format includes 7 sequential steps as follows: (1) define the rules of the debriefing, (2) explain the learning objectives of the simulation, (3) benchmark performance, (4) review what was supposed to happen during the simulation, (5) identify what actually happened, (6) examine why events occurred the way they did, and (7) formalize learning by reviewing with the group what went well, what did not go well and what they would do differently if faced with a similar situation in real life. We feel that the use of the health care simulation AAR debriefing format provides a structured and supported method to conduct an effective postsimulation debriefing, with a focus on the learning objectives and reliance on preidentified performance standards.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 93 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 12%
Other 10 11%
Researcher 9 10%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Psychology 6 6%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 23 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,109,513
of 15,418,159 outputs
Outputs from Simulation in Healthcare
#33
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,452
of 264,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Simulation in Healthcare
#1
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,418,159 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 264,083 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.