↓ Skip to main content

Co-debriefing for Simulation-based Education: A Primer for Facilitators

Overview of attention for article published in Simulation in Healthcare, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#11 of 718)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
54 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Co-debriefing for Simulation-based Education: A Primer for Facilitators
Published in
Simulation in Healthcare, February 2015
DOI 10.1097/sih.0000000000000077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheng A, Palaganas J, Eppich W, Rudolph J, Robinson T, Grant V, Cheng, Adam, Palaganas, Janice, Eppich, Walter, Rudolph, Jenny, Robinson, Traci, Grant, Vincent, Adam Cheng, Janice Palaganas, Walter Eppich, Jenny Rudolph, Traci Robinson, Vincent Grant, Palagan as, Janice

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 54 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 42 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Unspecified 5 11%
Other 18 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Unspecified 5 11%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 1 2%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#312,360
of 12,091,627 outputs
Outputs from Simulation in Healthcare
#11
of 718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,807
of 221,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Simulation in Healthcare
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,091,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 718 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. 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 221,408 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 21 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 90% of its contemporaries.