| Title |
Debriefing as Formative Assessment: Closing Performance Gaps in Medical Education
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Academic Emergency Medicine, November 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00248.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jenny W. Rudolph, Robert Simon, Daniel B. Raemer, Walter J. Eppich |
| Abstract |
The authors present a four-step model of debriefing as formative assessment that blends evidence and theory from education research, the social and cognitive sciences, experience drawn from conducting over 3,000 debriefings, and teaching debriefing to approximately 1,000 clinicians worldwide. The steps are to: 1) note salient performance gaps related to predetermined objectives, 2) provide feedback describing the gap, 3) investigate the basis for the gap by exploring the frames and emotions contributing to the current performance level, and 4) help close the performance gap through discussion or targeted instruction about principles and skills relevant to performance. The authors propose that the model, designed for postsimulation debriefings, can also be applied to bedside teaching in the emergency department (ED) and other clinical settings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 28% |
| Australia | 2 | 11% |
| Japan | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 61% |
| Scientists | 4 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 723 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 701 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 87 | 12% |
| Other | 75 | 10% |
| Researcher | 72 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 67 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 65 | 9% |
| Other | 234 | 32% |
| Unknown | 123 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 363 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 75 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 46 | 6% |
| Psychology | 28 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 2% |
| Other | 53 | 7% |
| Unknown | 145 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 23 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,504,402
of 24,932,492 outputs
Outputs from Academic Emergency Medicine
#471
of 3,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,692
of 100,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Academic Emergency Medicine
#5
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,932,492 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 100,485 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 161 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.