The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Objectives: Debriefing is a common feature of technology‐enhanced simulation ( TES ) education. However, evidence for its effectiveness remains unclear. We sought to characterise how debriefing is reported in the TES literature, identify debriefing features that are associated with improved outcomes, and evaluate the effectiveness of debriefing when combined with TES . Methods: We systematically searched databases, including MEDLINE , EMBASE and Scopus, and reviewed previous bibliographies for original comparative studies investigating the use of TES with debriefing in training health care providers. Reviewers, in duplicate, evaluated study quality and abstracted information on instructional design, debriefing and outcomes. Effect sizes ( ES ) were pooled using random‐effects meta‐analysis. Results: From 10 903 potentially eligible studies, we identified 177 studies (11 511 learners) that employed debriefing as part of TES . Key characteristics of debriefing (e.g. duration, educator presence and characteristics, content, structure/method, timing, use of video) were usually incompletely reported. A meta‐analysis of four studies demonstrated that video‐assisted debriefing has negligible and non‐significant effects for time skills ( ES = 0.10) compared with non‐video‐assisted debriefing. Meta‐analysis demonstrated non‐significant effects in favour of expert modelling with short debriefing in comparison with long debriefing (ES range = 0.21–0.74). Among studies comparing terminal with concurrent debriefing, results were variable depending on outcome measures and the context of training (e.g. medical resuscitation versus technical skills). Eight additional studies revealed insight into the roles of other debriefing‐related factors (e.g. multimedia debriefing, learner‐led debriefing, debriefing duration, content of debriefing). Among studies that compared simulation plus debriefing with no intervention, pooled ES s were favourable for all outcomes (ES range = 0.28–2.16). Conclusions: Limited evidence suggests that video‐assisted debriefing yields outcomes similar to those of non‐video‐assisted debriefing. Other debriefing design features show mixed or non‐significant results. As debriefing characteristics are usually incompletely reported, future debriefing research should describe all the key debriefing characteristics along with their associated descriptors.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Cheng et al [53] demonstrated that structured debriefing is an influential instructional component, facilitating reflection, performance analysis, and knowledge transfer to clinical contexts.”
From Enhancing Psychiatry Training Using an Agentic AI Simulated Consultation Tool: Prospective Cohort Study (2026) · cites this paper as [53]
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005 · Cited by 19,575
Barry Issenberg, S., Mcgaghie, W. C., Petrusa, E. R., Lee Gordon, D., & Scalese, R. J. (2005) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590500046924 · Cited by 3,966
The Handbook of Research Synthesis.
Howel, D., Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1995) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533295 · Cited by 3,657
Morris, S. B., & DeShon, R. P. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.105 · Cited by 2,502
Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations.
Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.64.4.349 · Cited by 1,822
A critical review of simulation‐based medical education research: 2003–2009
McGaghie, W. C., Issenberg, S. B., Petrusa, E. R., & Scalese, R. J. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x · Cited by 1,733
The Role of Debriefing in Simulation-Based Learning
Fanning, R. M., & Gaba, D. M. (2007) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e3180315539 · Cited by 1,714
Internet-Based Learning in the Health Professions
Cook, D., Levinson, A. J., Garside, S., Dupras, D. M., Erwin, P. J., & Montori, V. M. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.300.10.1181 · Cited by 1,603
Self-citationRudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Dufresne, R. L., & Raemer, D. B. (2006) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/01266021-200600110-00006 · Cited by 1,151
Association Between Funding and Quality of Published Medical Education Research
Reed, D. A., Cook, D. A., Beckman, T. J., Levine, R. B., Kern, D. E., & Wright, S. M. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.298.9.1002 · Cited by 961
Self-citationDebriefing with Good Judgment: Combining Rigorous Feedback with Genuine Inquiry
Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Rivard, P. E., Dufresne, R. L., & Raemer, D. B. (2007) · Anesthesiology Clinics · doi:10.1016/j.anclin.2007.03.007 · Cited by 855
Debriefing as Formative Assessment: Closing Performance Gaps in Medical Education
Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Raemer, D. B., & Eppich, W. (2008) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00248.x · Cited by 825
Self-citationCook, D. A., Hamstra, S. J., Brydges, R., Zendejas, B., Szostek, J. H., Wang, A. T., Erwin, P. J., & Hatala, R. A. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.714886 · Cited by 772
Self-citationRoizen, M. F. (2012) · Yearbook of Anesthesiology and Pain Management · doi:10.1016/j.yane.2012.02.026 · Cited by 434
Value of Debriefing during Simulated Crisis Management: Oral versusVideo-assisted Oral Feedback
Savoldelli, G. L., Naik, V. N., Park, J., Joo, H. S., Chow, R., & Hamstra, S. J. (2006) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/00000542-200608000-00010 · Cited by 430
Debriefing: Toward a Systematic Assessment of Theory and Practice
Lederman, L. C. (1992) · Simulation & Gaming · doi:10.1177/1046878192232003 · Cited by 415
Using Debriefing for Meaningful Learning to Foster Development of Clinical Reasoning in Simulation
Dreifuerst, K. T. (2012) · Journal of Nursing Education · doi:10.3928/01484834-20120409-02 · Cited by 366
"The essentials of debriefing in simulation learning: a concept analysis".
Chesak, S. S. (2010) · PubMed · Cited by 337
The essentials of debriefing in simulation learning: a concept analysis.
Dreifuerst, K. T. (2009) · PubMed · Cited by 330
Research Regarding Debriefing as Part of the Learning Process
Raemer, D. B., Anderson, M., Cheng, A., Fanning, R. M., Nadkarni, V., & Savoldelli, G. L. (2011) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e31822724d0 · Cited by 310
Self-citationThe art and science of debriefing in simulation: Ideal and practice
Dieckmann, P., Friis, S. M., Lippert, A. M., & Østergaard, D. (2009) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590902866218 · Cited by 309
Xeroulis, G., Park, J., Moulton, C.-A. E., Reznick, R. K., LeBlanc, V. R., & Dubrowski, A. (2007) · Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.surg.2006.09.012 · Cited by 298
Reed, D. A., Beckman, T. J., Wright, S. M., Levine, R. B., Kern, D. E., & Cook, D. A. (2008) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0664-3 · Cited by 284
Self-citationChiniara, G., Cole, G., Brisbin, K., Huffman, D., Cragg, B., Lamacchia, M., Norman, D., & Canadian Network For Simulation In Healthcare, G. W. G. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.733451 · Cited by 259
DeMaria, S., Bryson, E. O., Mooney, T. J., Silverstein, J. H., Reich, D. L., Bodian, C., & Levine, A. I. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03775.x · Cited by 233
Looking in the mirror: Self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises*
Boet, S., Bould, M. D., Bruppacher, H. R., Desjardins, F., Chandra, D. B., & Naik, V. N. (2011) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31820eb8be · Cited by 219
Dine, C. J., Gersh, R. E., Leary, M., Riegel, B. J., Bellini, L. M., & Abella, B. S. (2008) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e318186fe37 · Cited by 214
Debriefing in Simulated-Based Learning: Facilitating a Reflective Discussion
Arafeh, J. M. R., Hansen, S. S., & Nichols, A. (2010) · Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing · doi:10.1097/jpn.0b013e3181f6b5ec · Cited by 195
Publication Bias: A Brief Review for Clinicians
Montori, V. M., Smieja, M., & Guyatt, G. H. (2000) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.4065/75.12.1284 · Cited by 169
Comparison of Postsimulation Debriefing Versus In-Simulation Debriefing in Medical Simulation
Heukelom, J. N. V., Begaz, T., & Treat, R. W. (2010) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e3181be0d17 · Cited by 141
Concurrent Versus Terminal Feedback: It May Be Better to Wait
Walsh, C. M., Ling, S. C., Wang, C. S., & Carnahan, H. (2009) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181b38daf · Cited by 136
Sawyer, T., Sierocka-Castaneda, A., Chan, D. S., Berg, B. W., Lustik, M., & Thompson, M. W. (2012) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e3182578eae · Cited by 124
Using Video-Facilitated Feedback to Improve Student Performance Following High-Fidelity Simulation
Grant, J. S., Moss, J. A., Epps, C. A., & Watts, P. I. (2009) · Clinical Simulation in Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2009.09.001 · Cited by 121
Welke, T. M., LeBlanc, V. R., Savoldelli, G. L., Joo, H. S., Chandra, D. B., Crabtree, N. A., & Naik, V. N. (2009) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e3181a324ab · Cited by 119
LeFlore, J. L., Anderson, M., Michael, J. L., Engle, W. D., & Anderson, J. M. (2007) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e31812dfb46 · Cited by 112
Stefanidis, D., Korndorffer, J. R., Heniford, B. T., & Scott, D. J. (2007) · Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.surg.2007.03.009 · Cited by 111
Byrne, A. J., Sellen, A. J., Jones, J. G., Aitkenhead, A. R., Hussain, S., Gilder, F. J., Smith, H. L., & Ribes, P. (2002) · Anaesthesia · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2044.2002.02361.x · Cited by 98
Simulation-Based Training for Cardiac Auscultation Skills: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
McKinney, J., Cook, D. A., Wood, D. A., & Hatala, R. A. (2012) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-012-2198-y · Cited by 91
Self-citationHohl, C. M., Sadatsafavi, M., Nosyk, B., & Anis, A. H. (2008) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2007.00022.x · Cited by 85
Cognitive versus Technical Debriefing after Simulation Training
Bond, W. F., Deitrick, L. M., Eberhardt, M., Barr, G. C., Kane, B. G., Worrilow, C. C., Arnold, D. C., & Croskerry, P. (2006) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1197/j.aem.2005.10.013 · Cited by 57
Chang, J.-Y., Chang, G., Chien, C.-J. C., Chung, K., & Hsu, A. (2007) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20060154 · Cited by 57
Alternative Educational Models for Interdisciplinary Student Teams
LeFlore, J. L., & Anderson, M. (2009) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e318196f839 · Cited by 48
LeFlore, J. L., & Anderson, M. (2008) · The Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing · doi:10.1097/01.jpn.0000341364.60693.70 · Cited by 45
Effect of reducing frequency of augmented feedback on manual dexterity training and its retention
Wierinck, E., Puttemans, V., & van Steenberghe, D. (2006) · Journal of Dentistry · doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2005.12.005 · Cited by 32
Hayden, E. M., Navedo, D. D., & Gordon, J. A. (2012) · Telemedicine Journal and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2011.0217 · Cited by 32
Simulated Codes: Understanding the Response of Undergraduate Nursing Students
Leighton, K., & Scholl, K. (2009) · Clinical Simulation in Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2009.05.058 · Cited by 29
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sawyer, T., Eppich, W., Brett-Fleegler, M. B., Grant, V. J., & Cheng, A. (2016) · Simulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0000000000000148 · Cited by 693
“Despite the volume of information on debriefing available in the healthcare simulation literature, empiric evidence in support of a specific debriefing method is limited.(17,18) As such, simulation educators currently have little guidance on which of the various methods described in this review should be used.”
BackgroundSelf-citationCheng, A., Kessler, D. O., MACKINNON, R. J., Chang, T. P., Nadkarni, V., Hunt, E. A., Duval‐Arnould, J., Lin, Y., Cook, D. A., Pusic, M. V., et al. (2016) · Advances in Simulation · doi:10.1186/s41077-016-0025-y · Cited by 569
“Feedback and/or debriefing [11] Source Describe the source of feedback (e.”
BackgroundSelf-citationBuljac-Samardzic, M., Doekhie, K. D., & van Wijngaarden, J. D. H. (2020) · Human Resources for Health · doi:10.1186/s12960-019-0411-3 · Cited by 515
Cheng, A., Nadkarni, V., Mancini, M. B., Hunt, E. A., Sinz, E. H., Merchant, R. M., Donoghue, A. J., Duff, J. P., Eppich, W., Auerbach, M. A., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000583 · Cited by 461
Self-citationHealthcare Simulation Standards of Best PracticeTM The Debriefing Process
Decker, S., Alinier, G., Crawford, S. B., Gordon, R. M., Jenkins, D., & Wilson, C. A. (2021) · Clinical Simulation in Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2021.08.011 · Cited by 433
Metadata
- Authors
- Cheng, A., Eppich, W., Grant, V., Sherbino, J., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Calgary (CA)
- Northwestern University (US)
- McMaster University (CA)
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cheng, Adam
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-06-09
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 657-666
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W1986133144
- Cited by
- 481
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 51 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 5
- FWCI
- 4.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Keywords
- debriefing, simulation-based medical education, video-assisted debriefing
- MeSH terms
- Computer Simulation, Education, Medical, Education, Professional, Health Personnel, Humans, Teaching, Time Factors, Video Recording, Databases, Bibliographic, Problem-Based Learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
