ArticleSurgery open science2022
A debriefing tool to acquire non-technical skills in trauma courses.
Article in Surgery open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness and perceived value of feedback used in cardiac arrest simulation education: a mixed-method systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Translating training to medical practice in trauma care, a literature review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Review
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
Objective: The study reports the use of a nominal group technique (NGT) to evaluate the PEARLS Healthcare debriefing tool as a tool to foster non-technical skills in trauma simulation courses. Additionally, it introduces a debriefing card to be used in trauma courses. Design: A nominal group technique was used to evaluate the main strategies for PEARLS. The experts had the opportunity to share their opinions in an online survey and online meeting. Results: Seven participants participated in the nominal group. Based on the online survey results, the self-assessment debriefing strategy (from PEARLS) was rated 4.83/5 in relevance, the focused facilitation 5/5, and the provision of information 4.5/5. Participants felt that PEARLS was appropriate and useful for fostering non-technical skills: all the debriefing strategies contained in PEARLS were felt to be valid and worth using; and cue cards for the instructors were suggested to assist them in conducting structured formal debriefings. A specific debriefing tool for trauma scenarios was designed based on these suggestions, which is presented in this article. Conclusion: A nominal group of experts in education, simulation, and trauma support PEARLS strategies for non-technical skills training in trauma courses.
Indexed as
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.