ArticleAEM education and training2021
Evolution of clinical event debriefs in a quaternary pediatric emergency department after implementation of a debriefing tool.
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 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of neonatal resuscitation debriefings: mixed-methods results from a multicenter pilot study.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Implementation of Paediatric Life Support Recommendations: A Survey in the D-A-CH Region.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Team debriefing in the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study of a hospital-wide clinical event debriefing program and a novel qualitative model to analyze debriefing content.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2022Article
- Evolution of clinical event debriefs in a quaternary pediatric emergency department after implementation of a debriefing tool.AEM education and training · 2021Article
- Multidisciplinary Timely Debrief Sessions after Cardiac Arrests and Endotracheal Intubations in the Pediatric Emergency Department.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDebriefing clinical events in the emergency department (ED) can enhance team performance and provide mutual support. However, ED debriefing remains infrequent and nonstandardized. A clinical tool (DISCERN-Debriefing In Situ Conversation after Emergent Resuscitation Now) was developed to facilitate ED debriefing. To date, there are no studies providing qualitative analysis of clinical event debriefs done using such a tool. Our goal was to explore common themes elicited by debriefing following implementation of DISCERN.
methodsThis was a retrospective mixed-methods study analyzing DISCERN data from 2012 through 2017 in a pediatric ED. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. With constant comparison analysis, themes were categorized when applicable within the context of crisis resource management (CRM) principles, previously used as a framework for description of nontechnical skills. Member checking was performed to ensure trustworthiness.
resultsWe reviewed 400 DISCERN forms. Overall, 170 (41.6%) of target clinical events were debriefed during the study period. The number of clinical events debriefed per year decreased significantly over the study period, from 118 debriefed events in 2013 to 20 debriefed events in 2017 (
conclusionsUse of the DISCERN tool declined over the study period. The DISCERN tool was utilized more commonly after the highest-acuity events. Clinical event debriefs aligned with CRM principles, with medical knowledge discussed less frequently, and the content of debriefs remained stable over time.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.