Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38229166›Full record

ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2024

Exploring in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners in simulation-based education: an integrative review.

Prashant Kumar, Susan Somerville

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Exploring the Meta-debrief: Developing a Toolbox for Debriefing the Debrief.Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

2 authors.

Prashant KumarDepartment of Medical Education, NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. 130028772@dundee.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8745-2151
Susan SomervilleCentre for Medical Education & Dundee Institute for Healthcare Simulation, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFacilitator-led debriefings are well-established for debriefing groups of learners in immersive simulation-based education. However, there has been emerging interest in self-led debriefings whereby individuals or groups of learners conduct a debriefing themselves, without the presence of a facilitator. How and why self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes remains undetermined. RESEARCH

aimThe aim of this study was to explore how and why in-person self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes for groups of learners in immersive simulation-based education.

methodsAn integrative review was conducted, searching seven electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, ERIC, SCOPUS, CINAHL Plus, PsychINFO) for peer-reviewed empirical studies investigating in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners. Data were extracted, synthesised, and underwent reflexive thematic analysis.

resultsEighteen empirical studies identified through the search strategy were included in this review. There was significant heterogeneity in respect to study designs, aims, contexts, debriefing formats, learner characteristics, and data collection instruments. The synthesised findings of this review suggest that, across a range of debriefing outcome measures, in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners following immersive simulation-based education are preferable to conducting no debriefing at all. In certain cultural and professional contexts, such as postgraduate learners and those with previous debriefing experience, self-led debriefings can support effective learning and may provide equivalent educational outcomes to facilitator-led debriefings or self-led and facilitator-led combination strategies. Furthermore, there is some evidence to suggest that self-led and facilitator-led combination approaches may optimise participant learning, with this approach warranting further research. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data revealed four themes, promoting self-reflective practice, experience and background of learners, challenges of conducting self-led debriefings and facilitation and leadership. Similar to facilitator-led debriefings, promoting self-reflective practice within groups of learners is fundamental to how and why self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes.

conclusionsIn circumstances where simulation resources for facilitator-led debriefings are limited, self-led debriefings can provide an alternative opportunity to safeguard effective learning. However, their true value within the scope of immersive simulation-based education may lie as an adjunctive method alongside facilitator-led debriefings. Further research is needed to explore how to best enable the process of reflective practice within self-led debriefings to understand how, and in which contexts, self-led debriefings are best employed and thus maximise their potential use.

Indexed as

DebriefingFacilitator-led debriefingImmersive simulationSelf-debriefingSelf-led debriefingSimulation-based education

Identifiers

PMID38229166
PMCPMC10790376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.