ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2026
Socratic questioning to improve effective debriefing in health sciences: Students' voice.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is an urgent need to ensure that debriefing is effectively conducted in any clinical training in the health sciences field. Although higher education institutes (HEIs) are responsible for ensuring that learning outcomes are achieved through appropriate pedagogical approaches, there are challenges to providing effective debriefing in clinical training. Literature reveals that the Socratic questioning technique is an effective approach to facilitate debriefing. However, there is a lack of studies focusing on students' views and experiences on using Socratic questioning in debriefing in clinical training. This study aimed to explore South African health sciences students' views and experiences on using Socratic questioning in debriefing at a public university. MATERIALS AND
methodThe zone of proximal development model anchored this study as a theoretical lens. The authors adopted a qualitative single case study design within an interpretivist paradigm. Six participants were recruited for this study. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis. Ethical considerations were ensured in this study.
resultsThe findings of this study revealed that students express ambivalent views and experiences on using Socratic questioning in debriefing. The participants highlighted that Socratic questioning significantly promotes their critical thinking in debriefing sessions during clinical training. However, there were participants who expressed challenges. They pointed out the increased stress when answering Socratic questions. Furthermore, they articulated that universities should provide sufficient training for academic staff who facilitate the debriefing sessions through the Socratic questioning technique.
conclusionsThis study concluded the pivotal role of Socratic questioning in promoting the effective delivery of debriefing. Further studies should be conducted using diverse approaches, such as quantitative or mixed methods.
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.