Debriefing in Healthcare Simulation: A Bibliometric Analysis

Gül Şahin Karaduman; Tülay Başak

doi:10.31067/acusaglik.1550154

Research Article

BibTex

RIS

Cite

Debriefing in Healthcare Simulation: A Bibliometric Analysis

Year 2025, Volume: 16 Issue: Erken Çevrimiçi Yayınlar

Gül Şahin Karaduman , Tülay Başak

https://doi.org/10.31067/acusaglik.1550154

Abstract

Purpose: Debriefing facilitates the expression of actions and the rationale behind them, helps the students to correct their mistakes, and improves their knowledge and skills. This study aimed to provide a bibliometric analysis of the publications on debriefing and simulation that were indexed in the Scopus database.
Methods: The bibliometric analysis method was used to analyze relevant Scopus-indexed documents. The publications analyzed in the study were retrieved from the Scopus database using the keywords “debriefing” and “simulation”. Bibliometric analysis was used to classify the articles according to country, journals, keywords, and other parameters.
Results: The search produced a total of 326 publications. The articles were mostly published in nursing journals. Thematic analysis of the keywords revealed six themes and 33 keywords. Nine of the ten most cited publications provided information about debriefing session standards.
Conclusion: The publications with the keywords debriefing and simulation appeared in 2004, and the annual increase in these publications indexed in the Scopus database indicated an increase in productivity. The publications mostly appeared in journals of nursing. The keywords used followed the publications' aim and content, mostly related to debriefing and nursing students. The most cited publications provided guiding information for conducting the process of debriefing.

Keywords

Bibliometric analysis, Debriefing, Healthcare, Simulation

Ethical Statement

Ethical Approval Not applicable as this systematic review used already published data.

References

1. Garmaise-Yee J, Houston C, Johnson T, Sarmiento S. Virtual simulation debriefing in health professions education: a scoping review. JBI Evid Synth. 2022;
2. Hara K, Kuroki T, Fukuda M, Onita T, Kuroda H, Matsuura E, et al. Effects of Simulation-based Scrub Nurse Education for Novice Nurses in the Operating Room: A Longitudinal Study. Clin Simul Nurs. 2022 Jan 1;62:12–9.
3. Ing L, Cheng A, Lin Y. Debriefing for Simulation-Based Medical Education: A Survey From the International Network of Simulation-Based Pediatric Innovation, Research and Education. Simul Healthc [Internet]. 2022 Feb 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];17(1):1–6. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33428357/
4. Decker S, Alinier G, Crawford SB, Gordon RM, Jenkins D, Wilson C. Healthcare Simulation Standards of Best PracticeTM The Debriefing Process. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021 Sep 1;58:27–32.
5. Dufrene C, Young A. Successful debriefing - best methods to achieve positive learning outcomes: a literature review. Nurse Educ Today [Internet]. 2014 Mar [cited 2022 Apr 12];34(3):372–6. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23890542/
6. Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-Fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A. More Than One Way to Debrief: A Critical Review of Healthcare Simulation Debriefing Methods. Simul Healthc [Internet]. 2016 Jun 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];11(3):209–17. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27254527/
7. Özen Çınar İ. Bibliometric analysis of breast cancer research in the period 2009–2018. Int J Nurs Pract [Internet]. 2020 Jun 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];26(3):e12845. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ijn.12845
8. Giménez-Espert M del C, Prado-Gascó VJ. Bibliometric analysis of six nursing journals from the Web of Science, 2012-2017. J Adv Nurs [Internet]. 2019 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];75(3):543–54. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30289557/
9. Imani B, Zahra S, Mohammad M, Saberi K. A Bibliometric Analysis of International Journal of Nursing Studies (1963 – 2018). A Bibliometric Analysis of International Journal of Nursing Studies [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2024 Jul 23]; Available from: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac
10. Carter-Templeton H, Frazier RM, Wu L, H. Wyatt T. Robotics in Nursing: A Bibliometric Analysis. Journal of Nursing Scholarship [Internet]. 2018 Nov 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];50(6):582–9. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jnu.12399
11. Yanbing S, Ruifang Z, Chen W, Shifan H, Hua L, Zhiguang D. Bibliometric analysis of Journal of Nursing Management from 1993 to 2018. J Nurs Manag [Internet]. 2020 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];28(2):317–31. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31811671/
12. van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics [Internet]. 2010 Dec 31 [cited 2022 Apr 12];84(2):523–38. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
13. Montazeri A, Mohammadi S, M.Hesari P, Ghaemi M, Riazi H, Sheikhi-Mobarakeh Z. Preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO): a minimum requirements. Syst Rev [Internet]. 2023 Dec 1 [cited 2024 Jul 23];12(1):1–10. Available from: https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-023-02410-2
14. INACSL. INACSL Standards of Best Practice: SimulationSM Simulation Design. Clin Simul Nurs [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 May 21];12:S5–12. Available from: http://dx.doi.org//10.1016/j.ecns.2016.09.005
15. Wang Y, Li X, Liu Y, Shi B. Mapping the research hotspots and theme trends of simulation in nursing education: A bibliometric analysis from 2005 to 2019. Nurse Educ Today. 2022 Sep 1;116:105426.
16. Cant R, Ryan C, Kardong-Edgren S. Virtual simulation studies in nursing education: A bibliometric analysis of the top 100 cited studies, 2021. Nurse Educ Today. 2022 Jul 1;114:105385.
17. Zhu R, Liu M, Su Y, Meng X, Han S, Duan Z. A bibliometric analysis of publication of funded studies in nursing research from Web of Science, 2008-2018. J Adv Nurs [Internet]. 2021 Jan 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];77(1):176–88. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33119957/
18. Kokol P, Blažun Vošner H, Železnik D. Clinical Simulation in Nursing: A Bibliometric Analysis after Its Tenth Anniversary. Clin Simul Nurs [Internet]. 2017;13(4):161–7. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85013637452&doi=10.1016%2Fj.ecns.2016.11.007&partnerID=40&md5=d44e837ac1c0988306968d27dcda767b
19. Maloney S, Haines T. Issues of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness for simulation in health professions education. Advances in Simulation 2016 1:1 [Internet]. 2016 May 17 [cited 2022 Apr 12];1(1):1–6. Available from: https://advancesinsimulation.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41077-016-0020-3
20. Rudolph JW, Raemer DB, Simon R. Establishing a safe container for learning in simulation: the role of the presimulation briefing. Simul Healthc [Internet]. 2014 Dec 20 [cited 2024 Nov 26];9(6):339–49. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25188485/
21. Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simul Healthc [Internet]. 2015 Apr 17 [cited 2024 Nov 26];10(2):106–15. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25710312/
22. Dreifuerst KT. Using debriefing for meaningful learning to foster development of clinical reasoning in simulation. Journal of Nursing Education. 2012 Jun;51(6):326–33.
23. Levett-Jones T, Lapkin S. A systematic review of the effectiveness of simulation debriefing in health professional education. Nurse Educ Today [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2024 Nov 26];34(6). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24169444/
24. Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-Fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A. More Than One Way to Debrief: A Critical Review of Healthcare Simulation Debriefing Methods. Simul Healthc [Internet]. 2016 Jun 1 [cited 2024 Nov 26];11(3):209–17. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27254527/
25. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng A, Fanning R, Nadkarni V, Savoldelli G. Research Regarding Debriefing as Part of the Learning Process. Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare. 2011 Aug;6(7):S52–7.
26. Neill MA, Wotton K. High-fidelity simulation debriefing in nursing education: a literature review. Clin Simul Nurs [Internet]. 2011 Sep [cited 2022 Apr 12];7(5):e161–8. Available from: https://researchnow.flinders.edu.au/en/publications/high-fidelity-simulation-debriefing-in-nursing-education-a-litera
27. Shinnick MA, Woo M, Horwich TB, Steadman R. Debriefing: The Most Important Component in Simulation? Clin Simul Nurs. 2011 May;7(3):e105–11.
28. Neill MA, Wotton K. High-Fidelity Simulation Debriefing in Nursing Education: A Literature Review. Clin Simul Nurs. 2011 Sep;7(5):e161–8.
29. Walsh C, Lydon S, Byrne D, Madden C, Fox S, O’Connor P. The 100 Most Cited Articles on Healthcare Simulation: A Bibliometric Review. Simul Healthc [Internet]. 2018 Jun 1 [cited 2022 Apr 12];13(3):211–20. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29613918/
30. Kulkarni A V., Busse JW, Shams I. Characteristics Associated with Citation Rate of the Medical Literature. PLoS One [Internet]. 2007 May 2 [cited 2022 Apr 12];2(5):e403. Available from: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0000403