Exploring in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners in simulation-based education: an integrative review.

IF 2.8 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Advances in simulation (London, England) Pub Date : 2024-01-16 DOI:10.1186/s41077-023-00274-z
Prashant Kumar, Susan Somerville
{"title":"Exploring in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners in simulation-based education: an integrative review.","authors":"Prashant Kumar, Susan Somerville","doi":"10.1186/s41077-023-00274-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Facilitator-led debriefings are well-established for debriefing groups of learners in immersive simulation-based education. However, there has been emerging interest in self-led debriefings whereby individuals or groups of learners conduct a debriefing themselves, without the presence of a facilitator. How and why self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes remains undetermined.</p><p><strong>Research aim: </strong>The aim of this study was to explore how and why in-person self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes for groups of learners in immersive simulation-based education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An integrative review was conducted, searching seven electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, ERIC, SCOPUS, CINAHL Plus, PsychINFO) for peer-reviewed empirical studies investigating in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners. Data were extracted, synthesised, and underwent reflexive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen empirical studies identified through the search strategy were included in this review. There was significant heterogeneity in respect to study designs, aims, contexts, debriefing formats, learner characteristics, and data collection instruments. The synthesised findings of this review suggest that, across a range of debriefing outcome measures, in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners following immersive simulation-based education are preferable to conducting no debriefing at all. In certain cultural and professional contexts, such as postgraduate learners and those with previous debriefing experience, self-led debriefings can support effective learning and may provide equivalent educational outcomes to facilitator-led debriefings or self-led and facilitator-led combination strategies. Furthermore, there is some evidence to suggest that self-led and facilitator-led combination approaches may optimise participant learning, with this approach warranting further research. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data revealed four themes, promoting self-reflective practice, experience and background of learners, challenges of conducting self-led debriefings and facilitation and leadership. Similar to facilitator-led debriefings, promoting self-reflective practice within groups of learners is fundamental to how and why self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In circumstances where simulation resources for facilitator-led debriefings are limited, self-led debriefings can provide an alternative opportunity to safeguard effective learning. However, their true value within the scope of immersive simulation-based education may lie as an adjunctive method alongside facilitator-led debriefings. Further research is needed to explore how to best enable the process of reflective practice within self-led debriefings to understand how, and in which contexts, self-led debriefings are best employed and thus maximise their potential use.</p>","PeriodicalId":72108,"journal":{"name":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","volume":"9 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10790376/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-023-00274-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Facilitator-led debriefings are well-established for debriefing groups of learners in immersive simulation-based education. However, there has been emerging interest in self-led debriefings whereby individuals or groups of learners conduct a debriefing themselves, without the presence of a facilitator. How and why self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes remains undetermined.

Research aim: The aim of this study was to explore how and why in-person self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes for groups of learners in immersive simulation-based education.

Methods: An integrative review was conducted, searching seven electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, ERIC, SCOPUS, CINAHL Plus, PsychINFO) for peer-reviewed empirical studies investigating in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners. Data were extracted, synthesised, and underwent reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: Eighteen empirical studies identified through the search strategy were included in this review. There was significant heterogeneity in respect to study designs, aims, contexts, debriefing formats, learner characteristics, and data collection instruments. The synthesised findings of this review suggest that, across a range of debriefing outcome measures, in-person self-led debriefings for groups of learners following immersive simulation-based education are preferable to conducting no debriefing at all. In certain cultural and professional contexts, such as postgraduate learners and those with previous debriefing experience, self-led debriefings can support effective learning and may provide equivalent educational outcomes to facilitator-led debriefings or self-led and facilitator-led combination strategies. Furthermore, there is some evidence to suggest that self-led and facilitator-led combination approaches may optimise participant learning, with this approach warranting further research. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data revealed four themes, promoting self-reflective practice, experience and background of learners, challenges of conducting self-led debriefings and facilitation and leadership. Similar to facilitator-led debriefings, promoting self-reflective practice within groups of learners is fundamental to how and why self-led debriefings influence debriefing outcomes.

Conclusions: In circumstances where simulation resources for facilitator-led debriefings are limited, self-led debriefings can provide an alternative opportunity to safeguard effective learning. However, their true value within the scope of immersive simulation-based education may lie as an adjunctive method alongside facilitator-led debriefings. Further research is needed to explore how to best enable the process of reflective practice within self-led debriefings to understand how, and in which contexts, self-led debriefings are best employed and thus maximise their potential use.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索模拟教学中学习者群体的当面自我汇报:综合评述。
背景:在基于沉浸式模拟的教育中,由引导者主导的汇报对于向学习者群体进行汇报是行之有效的方法。然而,人们开始对自我领导的汇报产生兴趣,即个人或学习小组在没有主持人在场的情况下自己进行汇报。研究目的:本研究的目的是探讨在基于沉浸式模拟的教育中,面对面的自我汇报如何以及为什么会影响学习者小组的汇报结果:方法:我们进行了一项综合综述,搜索了七个电子数据库(PubMed、Cochrane、Embase、ERIC、SCOPUS、CINAHL Plus、PsychINFO),以查找经同行评审的、调查学习者小组当面自我汇报的实证研究。对数据进行了提取、综合和反思性主题分析:本综述纳入了通过搜索策略确定的 18 项实证研究。在研究设计、目的、背景、汇报形式、学习者特征和数据收集工具等方面存在明显的异质性。本综述的综合结果表明,在一系列汇报结果的衡量标准中,为沉浸式模拟教育后的学习者群体提供亲自主持的汇报比不进行汇报更可取。在某些文化和专业背景下,例如研究生学员和以前有过汇报经验的学员,自我主导的汇报可以支持有效的学习,并可能提供与主持人主导的汇报或自我主导与主持人主导相结合的策略相当的教育成果。此外,有证据表明,自我主导与引导者主导相结合的方法可以优化学员的学习,这种方法值得进一步研究。对数据进行的反思性专题分析揭示了四个主题,即促进自我反思实践、学员的经验和背景、开展自我引导式汇报的挑战以及引导和领导力。与主持人主导的汇报类似,促进学习者群体的自我反思实践对于自我主导的汇报如何以及为什么会影响汇报结果至关重要:在主持人主持的汇报模拟资源有限的情况下,自我领导的汇报可以提供另一种机会,保障有效的学习。然而,在基于沉浸式模拟的教育范围内,其真正价值可能在于作为一种辅助方法,与主持人主导的汇报并存。需要进一步开展研究,探索如何在自我汇报中最好地实现反思性实践过程,以了解如何以及在哪些情况下最好地采用自我汇报,从而最大限度地发挥其潜在作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Massive open online course: a new strategy for faculty development needs in healthcare simulation. Changing the conversation: impact of guidelines designed to optimize interprofessional facilitation of simulation-based team training. Speech recognition technology for assessing team debriefing communication and interaction patterns: An algorithmic toolkit for healthcare simulation educators. Effectiveness of hybrid simulation training on medical student performance in whole-task consultation of cardiac patients: The ASSIMILATE EXCELLENCE randomized waitlist-controlled trial. Using simulation scenarios and a debriefing structure to promote feedback skills among interprofessional team members in clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1