Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39432489›Full record

ArticleSimulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare2025

Exploring the Meta-debrief: Developing a Toolbox for Debriefing the Debrief.

Prashant Kumar, Kathleen Collins, Nathan Oliver, Rowan Duys, Jocelyn Frances Park-Ross, Catherine Paton, Colette Laws-Chapman, Walter Eppich, Neil McGowan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 2025. 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. 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

9 authors.

Prashant KumarFrom the Department of Anaesthesia (P.K.), NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Education (P.K., N.M.), NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Scotland, United Kingdom; School of Medicine (P.K., K.C., C.P., N.M.), Dentistry & Nursing, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom; Department of Medical Education (K.C., C.P.), NHS Lanarkshire, Scotland, United Kingdom; School of Nursing & Midwifery (N.O.), University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia; College of Medicine & Veterinary Medicine (N.O.), University of Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom; Department of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine (R.D.), University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa; Division of Global Surgery (R.D., J.F.P.-R.), Department of Surgery, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa; Simulation in Healthcare for African Research and Education (SHARE) Initiative (J.F.P.-R.), South Africa; Simulation & Interactive Learning Centre (C.L.-C.), Guys & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom, and Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia (W.E.).ORCID 0000-0002-8745-2151
Kathleen Collins
Nathan Oliver
Rowan Duys
Jocelyn Frances Park-Ross
Catherine Paton
Colette Laws-Chapman
Walter Eppich
Neil McGowan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

summary statementOtherwise known as debriefing the debrief, meta-debriefing describes the practice of debriefing simulation facilitators after they have facilitated, or observed, a debriefing. It is a vital component of enhancing debriefing skills, irrespective of where debriefers may be in terms of their professional development journey from novice to expert. We present the following 4 fundamental pillars, which underpin the creation of an impactful meta-debriefing strategy: theoretically driven, psychologically safe, context dependent, and formative in function. Furthermore, we describe various strategies that, underpinned by these 4 key pillars, contribute to a toolbox of techniques that enable meta-debriefers to develop proficiency and flexibility in their practice. We have synthesized and critically reviewed the current evidence base, derived mostly from the debriefing literature, and highlighted gaps to address in meta-debriefing contexts. We hope this article stimulates discussion among simulation practitioners, progresses the science and art of meta-debriefing, and prompts further research so that meta-debriefing can become an integral evidence-based component of our faculty development processes.

Indexed as

Formative FeedbackSimulation TrainingClinical CompetenceHumansDebriefingdebriefing the debrieffaculty developmentmeta-debriefingsimulation-based education

Identifiers

PMID39432489
PMCPMC12129385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.