A new tool for assessing short debriefings after immersive simulation: validity of the SHORT scale.

Clicks: 272
ID: 22613
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #67 of 146 articles by views in BMC medical education

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 146 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Simulation is being increasingly used worldwide in healthcare education. However, it is costly both in terms of finances and human resources. As a consequence, several institutions have designed programs offering several short immersive simulation sessions, each followed by short debriefings. Although debriefing is recommended, no tool exists to assess appropriateness of short debriefings after such simulation sessions. We have developed the Simulation in Healthcare retrOaction Rating Tool (SHORT) to assess short debriefings, and provide some validity evidence for its use.We designed this scale based on our experience and previously published instruments, and tested it by assessing short debriefings of simulation sessions offered to emergency medicine residents at Laval University (Canada) from 2015 to 2016. Analysis of its reliability and validity was done using Standards for educational and psychological testing. Generalizability theory was used for testing internal structure evidence for validity.Two raters independently assessed 22 filmed short debriefings. Mean debriefing length was 10:35 (min 7:21; max 14:32). Calculated generalizability (reliability) coefficients are φ = 0.80 and φ-λ3 = 0.82. The generalizability coefficient for a single rater assessing three debriefings is φ = 0.84.The G study shows a high generalizability coefficient (φ ≥ 0.80), which demonstrates a high reliability. The response process evidence for validity provides evidence that no errors were associated with using the instrument. Further studies should be done to demonstrate validity of the English version of the instrument and to validate its use by novice raters trained in the use of the SHORT.
Reference Key
rivire2019abmc Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Rivière, Etienne;Aubin, Etienne;Tremblay, Samuel-Lessard;Lortie, Gilles;Chiniara, Gilles;
Journal BMC medical education
Year 2019
DOI
10.1186/s12909-019-1503-4
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.