These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34457957)

  • 1. Student Performance During a Simulated Patient Encounter Has No Impact on Debriefer Adherence to PEARLS Debriefing Model.
    McNutt R; Tews M; Kleinheksel AJ
    Med Sci Educ; 2021 Jun; 31(3):1141-1148. PubMed ID: 34457957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Impact of the PEARLS Healthcare Debriefing cognitive aid on facilitator cognitive load, workload, and debriefing quality: a pilot study.
    Meguerdichian M; Bajaj K; Ivanhoe R; Lin Y; Sloma A; de Roche A; Altonen B; Bentley S; Cheng A; Walker K
    Adv Simul (Lond); 2022 Dec; 7(1):40. PubMed ID: 36503623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing.
    Eppich W; Cheng A
    Simul Healthc; 2015 Apr; 10(2):106-15. PubMed ID: 25710312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quality of interdisciplinary postsimulation debriefing: 360° evaluation.
    Hull L; Russ S; Ahmed M; Sevdalis N; Birnbach DJ
    BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn; 2017; 3(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 35515097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Immediate faculty feedback using debriefing timing data and conversational diagrams.
    Coggins A; Hong SS; Baliga K; Halamek LP
    Adv Simul (Lond); 2022 Mar; 7(1):7. PubMed ID: 35256014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Faculty Development Workshop to Enhance Debriefing Skills Among Novice Facilitators.
    Abulebda K; Srinivasan S; Maa T; Stormorken A; Chumpitazi CE
    Cureus; 2020 Feb; 12(2):e6942. PubMed ID: 32195066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cultural Prototypes and Differences in Simulation Debriefing.
    Ulmer FF; Sharara-Chami R; Lakissian Z; Stocker M; Scott E; Dieckmann P
    Simul Healthc; 2018 Aug; 13(4):239-246. PubMed ID: 29672469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Debriefer cognitive load during Traditional Reflective Debriefing vs. Rapid Cycle Deliberate Practice interdisciplinary team training.
    Wiltrakis S; Hwu R; Holmes S; Iyer S; Goodwin N; Mathai C; Gillespie S; Hebbar KB; Colman N
    Adv Simul (Lond); 2024 Jun; 9(1):23. PubMed ID: 38835053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Comparison of 2 Debriefing Rubrics to Assess Facilitator Adherence to the PEARLS Debriefing Framework.
    Guimbarda N; Boghani F; Tews M; Kleinheksel AJ
    Simul Healthc; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38652076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Simulation debriefing: a perspective from emergency medical care students at three South African Higher Education Institutions.
    Makkink AW; Dreyer DJ
    Pan Afr Med J; 2021; 38():97. PubMed ID: 33889263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Impact of Single-Dose Debriefing for Meaningful Learning Training on Debriefer Quality, Time, and Outcomes: Early Evidence to Inform Debriefing Training and Frequency.
    Bradley CS; Johnson BK; Woda A; Hansen J; Loomis A; Dreifuerst KT
    Nurs Educ Perspect; 2023 Nov-Dec 01; 44(6):E33-E38. PubMed ID: 37493400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Does a Written Tool to Guide Structured Debriefing Improve Discourse? Implications for Interprofessional Team Simulation.
    Thompson R; Sullivan S; Campbell K; Osman I; Statz B; Jung HS
    J Surg Educ; 2018 Nov; 75(6):e240-e245. PubMed ID: 30093336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Helping healthcare teams to debrief effectively: associations of debriefers' actions and participants' reflections during team debriefings.
    Kolbe M; Grande B; Lehmann-Willenbrock N; Seelandt JC
    BMJ Qual Saf; 2023 Mar; 32(3):160-172. PubMed ID: 35902231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The relationship between facilitators' questions and the level of reflection in postsimulation debriefing.
    Husebø SE; Dieckmann P; Rystedt H; Søreide E; Friberg F
    Simul Healthc; 2013 Jun; 8(3):135-42. PubMed ID: 23343839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. DE-CODE: a coding scheme for assessing debriefing interactions.
    Seelandt JC; Grande B; Kriech S; Kolbe M
    BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn; 2018; 4(2):51-58. PubMed ID: 35515884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quality with quantity? Evaluating interprofessional faculty prebriefs and debriefs for simulation training using video.
    Paige JT; Zamjahn JB; Carvalho RB; Yang S; Yu Q; Garbee DD; Kiselov VJ; Rusnak V; Bonanno L; Callan C
    Surgery; 2019 Jun; 165(6):1069-1074. PubMed ID: 30982645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. PEARLS for Systems Integration: A Modified PEARLS Framework for Debriefing Systems-Focused Simulations.
    Dubé MM; Reid J; Kaba A; Cheng A; Eppich W; Grant V; Stone K
    Simul Healthc; 2019 Oct; 14(5):333-342. PubMed ID: 31135684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of simulation debriefing methods with interprofessional learning.
    Brown DK; Wong AH; Ahmed RA
    J Interprof Care; 2018 Jul; 32(1):779-781. PubMed ID: 30024297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Interdisciplinary clinical debriefing in the emergency department: an observational study of learning topics and outcomes.
    Coggins A; Santos AL; Zaklama R; Murphy M
    BMC Emerg Med; 2020 Oct; 20(1):79. PubMed ID: 33028206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparing reflection levels between facilitator-led and student-led debriefing in simulation training for paramedic students.
    Christiansen CR; Andersen JV; Dieckmann P
    Adv Simul (Lond); 2023 Dec; 8(1):30. PubMed ID: 38098131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.