ArticleAJP reports2026
Novel Application of the After-Action Review Technique for Therapeutic Debriefing after Unscheduled Cesarean Births.
Article in AJP reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: While birth-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) rates are rising, obstetric providers are ill-equipped to lead the trauma response. To address this need, we employed the After-Action Review (AAR) method in semistructured interviews with patients who recently underwent unanticipated cesarean deliveries. We performed qualitative analyses to determine if the AAR technique could (1) provide a therapeutic outlet to patients who experienced trauma and (2) elicit patient-derived quality improvement opportunities. Study Design: Twenty patients and their support people were interviewed during the delivery admission, 3 months postpartum, and via an anonymous survey. Two independent coders analyzed transcripts and themes were generated inductively. Results: All surveyed patients found this process helpful, and 80% suggested an improvement, including educating patients about cesareans earlier and designating a specific staff member to support the patient during a cesarean or code. Five main themes emerged: (1) Mental adaptation to new care plan (reported by 95%), (2) prioritizing safety of baby (85%), (3) external influences on birth expectations (70%), (4) importance of support from various team members (85%), and (5) balance between autonomy and desiring definitive recommendations (75% vs. 30%). Interviewers found the technique easy to apply. Conclusion: AAR provides a novel, effective, and reproducible mechanism for therapeutic debriefing and generating patient-centered opportunities to improve care within obstetrics.
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.