↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Debriefing in the Emergency Department After Clinical Events: A Practical Guide

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Emergency Medicine, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
52 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
112 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
268 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Blogs Twitter Facebook Dimensions citations
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
Debriefing in the Emergency Department After Clinical Events: A Practical Guide
Published in
Annals of Emergency Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.10.019
Pubmed ID
25455910
Authors

David O. Kessler, Adam Cheng, Paul C. Mullan

Abstract

One vital aspect of emergency medicine management is communication after episodes of care to improve future performance through group reflection on the shared experience. This reflective activity in teams is known as debriefing, and despite supportive evidence highlighting its benefits, many practitioners experience barriers to implementing debriefing in the clinical setting. The aim of this article is to review the current evidence supporting postevent debriefing and discuss practical approaches to implementing debriefing in the emergency department. We will address the who, what, when, where, why, and how of debriefing and provide a practical guide for the clinician to facilitate debriefing in the clinical environment.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 265 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 48 18%
Other 34 13%
Researcher 31 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 7%
Student > Postgraduate 18 7%
Other 66 25%
Unknown 51 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 54 20%
Psychology 13 5%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 1%
Other 11 4%
Unknown 65 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 04 March 2021.
All research outputs
#676,051
of 21,321,365 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#425
of 6,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,363
of 206,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Emergency Medicine
#8
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,321,365 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 206,563 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.