| Title |
Co-debriefing for Simulation-based Education
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Simulation in Healthcare, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1097/sih.0000000000000077 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adam Cheng, Janice Palaganas, Walter Eppich, Jenny Rudolph, Traci Robinson, Vincent Grant |
| Abstract |
As part of simulation-based education, postevent debriefing provides an opportunity for learners to critically reflect on the simulated experience, with the goal of identifying areas in need of reinforcement and correcting areas in need of improvement. The art of debriefing is made more challenging when 2 or more educators must facilitate a debriefing together (ie, co-debriefing) in an organized and coordinated fashion that ultimately enhances learning. As the momentum for incorporating simulation-based health care education continues to grow, the need for faculty development in the area of co-debriefing has become essential. In this article, we provide a practical toolbox for co-facilitators by discussing the advantages of co-debriefing, describing some of the challenges associated with co-debriefing, and offering practical approaches and strategies to overcome the most common challenges associated with co-debriefing in the context of simulation-based health care education. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 56 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 20% |
| United States | 8 | 14% |
| Canada | 8 | 14% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 22 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 48% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 27% |
| Scientists | 9 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 196 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 26 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 10% |
| Researcher | 17 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 8% |
| Other | 51 | 26% |
| Unknown | 52 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Psychology | 4 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Unknown | 58 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 28 October 2022.
All research outputs
#856,406
of 23,978,545 outputs
Outputs from Simulation in Healthcare
#13
of 1,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,203
of 267,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Simulation in Healthcare
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,978,545 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 1,089 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 267,864 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.