ArticleAdvances in simulation (London, England)2026
Transfer of clinical debriefing from simulation to practice: exploring the barriers and enablers.
Article in Advances in simulation (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundClinical debriefing (CD) positively impacts individuals, teams and systems and has been shown to improve patient outcomes and staff wellbeing. Although there is a growing evidence base supporting CD, it has not been routinely adopted by many healthcare organisations. Despite the work environment being an important component of transfer of learning, there has been minimal focus on how it influences implementation and maintenance of CD in practice. The overall aim of this study was to explore the work environment barriers and enablers influencing the transfer of clinical debriefing skills from simulation to clinical practice.
methodsFollowing ethical approval, medical registrars who had participated in a simulation course involving a within-scenario CD were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. These utilised Burke and Hutchins' evaluation model as the initial conceptual framework and took place at least two months post-course. Interviews explored participants' experiences of transferring learning related to CD from simulation to the clinical workplace, and were transcribed verbatim and dual coded using template analysis.
resultsFifteen medical registrars participated in interviews between January and May 2025. The work environment influences from Burke and Hutchins' evaluation model resonated as important factors affecting adoption of CD. With the addition of subthemes generated inductively from the data, the model provided a framework for identification and articulation of the barriers and enablers to CD in the workplace. The most striking finding was participants' sense of personal responsibility to engage with CD. In addition, participants identified the requirement for cultural change to enable CD.
conclusionsWork environment influences represent both barriers and enablers of CD in relation to the transfer of learning from simulation to clinical practice. Personal responsibility and workplace culture are important drivers of CD, and attention should be paid to the influence of both constructs in this context. Recommendations for practice, based on our findings, are designed to enable educators and organisations to promote the adoption of CD in their own settings. This will help to bridge the gap and make CD the norm, not the exception.
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.