↓ Skip to main content

‘The Diamond’: a structure for simulation debrief

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Teacher, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 653)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
56 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
211 Mendeley
Title
‘The Diamond’: a structure for simulation debrief
Published in
Clinical Teacher, May 2015
DOI 10.1111/tct.12300
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Jaye, Libby Thomas, Gabriel Reedy

Abstract

Despite debriefing being found to be the most important element in providing effective learning in simulation-based medical education reviews, there are only a few examples in the literature to help guide a debriefer. The diamond debriefing method is based on the technique of description, analysis and application, along with aspects of the advocacy-inquiry approach and of debriefing with good judgement. It is specifically designed to allow an exploration of the non-technical aspects of a simulated scenario. The debrief diamond, a structured visual reminder of the debrief process, was developed through teaching simulation debriefing to hundreds of faculty members over several years. The diamond shape visually represents the idealised process of a debrief: opening out a facilitated discussion about the scenario, before bringing the learning back into sharp focus with specific learning points. Debriefing is the most important element in providing effective learning in simulation-based medical education reviews INNOVATION: The Diamond is a two-sided prompt sheet: the first contains the scaffolding, with a series of specifically constructed questions for each phase of the debrief; the second lays out the theory behind the questions and the process. The Diamond encourages a standardised approach to high-quality debriefing on non-technical skills. Feedback from learners and from debriefing faculty members has indicated that the Diamond is useful and valuable as a debriefing tool, benefiting both participants and faculty members. It can be used by junior and senior faculty members debriefing in pairs, allowing the junior faculty member to conduct the description phase, while the more experienced faculty member leads the later and more challenging phases. The Diamond gives an easy but pedagogically sound structure to follow and specific prompts to use in the moment.

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.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 209 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 29 14%
Student > Master 29 14%
Student > Postgraduate 28 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Unspecified 18 9%
Other 88 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 121 57%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 17%
Unspecified 20 9%
Social Sciences 19 9%
Psychology 4 2%
Other 11 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 25 September 2019.
All research outputs
#446,874
of 13,589,545 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Teacher
#9
of 653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,868
of 233,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Teacher
#1
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,589,545 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 653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. 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 233,750 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 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.