Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33842804›Full record

ArticleAEM education and training2021

Psychometric Testing of the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) for Trainee-led, In Situ Simulations in the Pediatric Emergency Department Context.

Shiva Zargham, Amy Hanson, Megan Laniewicz, Mary Sandquist, David O Kessler, Gregory E Gilbert, Aaron W Calhoun

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AEM education and training, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shiva ZarghamDepartment of Pediatrics University of Louisville School of Medicine Louisville KY USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4165-7263
Amy HansonDepartment of Pediatrics University of Louisville School of Medicine Louisville KY USA.
Megan LaniewiczDepartment of Pediatrics University of Louisville School of Medicine Louisville KY USA.
Mary SandquistDepartment of Pediatrics University of Louisville School of Medicine Louisville KY USA.
David O Kesslerand the Department of Emergency Medicine Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians & Surgeons New York NY USA.
Gregory E Gilbertand the ΣgmaΣtats Consulting, LLC Charleston SC USA.
Aaron W CalhounDepartment of Pediatrics University of Louisville School of Medicine Louisville KY USA.
University of Louisville · USColumbia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEffective trainee-led debriefing after critical events in the pediatric emergency department has potential to improve patient care, but debriefing assessments for this context have not been developed. This study gathers preliminary validity and reliability evidence for the Debriefing Assessment for Simulation in Healthcare (DASH) as an assessment of trainee-led post-critical event debriefing.

methodsEight fellows led teams in three simulated critical events, each followed by a video-recorded discussion of performance mimicking impromptu debriefings occurring after real clinical events. Three raters assessed the recorded debriefings using the DASH, and their feedback was collated. Data were analyzed using generalizability theory, Gwet's AC

resultsThe DASH instrument had relatively low traditional inter-rater reliability (Gwet's AC

conclusionsOur results suggest that the DASH does not have sufficient validity and reliability to rigorously assess debriefing in the post-critical event environment but may be amenable to modification. Further development of the tool will be needed for optimal use in this context.

Identifiers

PMID33842804
PMCPMC8019148
OpenAlexW3027966955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.