Community, population, and public health nurse educators use of clinical debriefing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The Next Generation NCLEX licensing examination is used to assess entry-level nurses’ ability to use clinical judgment in the care of individuals, families, and populations. An approach in developing clinical judgment is using a standardized debriefing process after a clinical experience. The purpose of this research was to examine whether community, population, and public health (CPPH) baccalaureate nurse educators received education on the use of clinical debriefing with their students and to describe the type of debriefing approaches used to transfer nursing theory into clinical practice.Methods: This study used a mixed method approach. Convenience sampling was used to conduct a descriptive survey of CPPH educators use of clinical debriefing using SurveyMonkey®. Three focus group sessions were held with participants representing a variety of BSN degree formats in nursing programs across the continental United States. These virtual meetings used the Zoom® conference platform. Each focus group was recorded with a transcription of the session. Transcriptions were evaluated using NVivo® and placed into five themes with additional subthemes.Results: The analysis indicated that CPPH BSN nurse educators lack formal training in the use of post-clinical debriefing. Educators’ debriefing approaches are not formalized or standardized across nursing programs and do not meet current best practices. Nurse educators identified barriers to debriefing with students, including geographic location, variety of clinical placements, and large numbers of students. Some nurse educators use debriefing techniques developed in non-nursing disciplines and for non-clinical debriefing situations. Focus group participants expressed interest in the development of a clinical debriefing tool for CPPH courses.Conclusions: The research demonstrates that CPPH nurse educators do not feel experientially prepared to lead debriefing. The lack of formalized education has resulted in nurse educators using debriefing methods that do not meet best practices. This could result in ineffective student development of clinical judgment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.031 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".