ArticleJournal of nursing management2026
Learners' Perspectives on Interprofessional Simulation and Co-Debriefing: An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Study.
Article in Journal of nursing management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Learners' Perspectives on Interprofessional Simulation and Co-Debriefing: An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Interprofessional simulation enhances both technical and nontechnical skills among healthcare professionals, improving their clinical practice. Co-debriefing, where two facilitators lead debriefing sessions, is a common approach in these trainings. This study aims to assess educational aspects of interprofessional simulation and co-debriefing in postgraduate medical and emergency nursing students. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study with a mixed-methods approach was conducted among postgraduate students ( Results: Students' perceptions were evaluated across six dimensions: applicability, satisfaction, motivation, safe environment, organization, and co-debriefing. Significant differences were found between medical and nursing students in all dimensions except applicability and organization. Overall, students rated interdisciplinary sessions and co-debriefing positively, though nurses highlighted areas for improvement, such as icebreaker activities, more dynamic simulations, and equal representation of both professions. Conclusions: While interprofessional simulation and co-debriefing were well received, participants-especially nurses-identified areas for enhancement to ensure a more balanced and engaging learning experience. By integrating quantitative outcomes with qualitative insights, the study highlights when co-debriefing adds value in interprofessional simulation and when single-facilitator approaches may be sufficient.
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.