E-learningE-GTBYEPNCT06745713
The Effectiveness of E-Learning Application Developed for Chest Tube Care in Nursing Students
A study testing Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short Version, Student Information Form and Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students in people with E-learning and Nursing Care, run by Gazi University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the e-learning application developed for chest tube care in nursing students. Within the scope of this study, the e-learning application developed for chest tube care in nursing students and the effectiveness of this e-learning application were evaluated. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- E-learning, Nursing Care, Chest Tube
- What is being tested?
- Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short Version, Student Information Form and Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 108 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 13 Aug 2024to 15 Sep 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 18 years of age or older,
- To be able to understand and speak Turkish,
- To be enrolled in the 3rd year of the Nursing Department,
- Taking Surgical Diseases Nursing course for the first time,
- To be able to access Internet,
- Voluntary acceptance to participate in the research.
Who cannot join
- Notifying that he/she wants to leave the research at any stage of the research,
- They did not participate in any of the steps of the e-learning application such as pre-test, watching the videos, post-test, evaluation activities, etc.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Effectiveness of E-Learning Application Developed For Chest Tube Care in Nursing Students
This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the e-learning application developed for chest tube care in nursing students. Within the scope of this study, the e-learning application developed for chest tube care in nursing students and the effectiveness of this e-learning application were evaluated.
Read the detailed description
At the beginning of the study, 'Student Information Form', 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students', 'Self-Managed Learning Scale' and 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' were applied to the participants. Then, the students were divided into two groups, 54 in the experimental group and 54 in the control group, and they were provided to enter the 'Chest Tube Care Management E-Learning Application'. The students in the groups were then asked to complete the module containing activities such as videos, short tests, puzzles in the content of the e-learning application opened to them at different times. When the students in the groups completed the module, 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students', 'Self-Managed Learning Scale' and 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' were applied. Participation in this study was voluntary and participants could leave the study at any stage of the study if they wished. The confidentiality of the participant's data was protected and used only for this study.
Hypothesis 1:
H0: There is no significant difference between the chest tube care management knowledge scores of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
H1: There is a significant difference between the chest tube care management knowledge scores of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
Hypothesis 2:
H0: There is no significant difference between chest tube care management clinical reasoning readiness scale scores of students using chest tube care management e-learning application and control group students.
H1: There is a significant difference between the clinical reasoning readiness scale scores of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
Hypothesis 3:
H0: There is no significant difference between the chest tube care management self-directed learning skill levels of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
H1: There is a significant difference between the chest tube care management self-directed learning skill levels of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
- Conditions
- E-learning, Nursing Care, Chest Tube, Nursing Education
- Being tested
- Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short Version, Student Information Form, Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students, Self-directed Learning Scale, Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test
- Keywords
- chest tube care, e-learning, nursing care, nursing students, clinical reasoning
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short VersionOther
Developed in 1995 by Lewis at IBM, the Computer System Usability Questionnaire (CSUQ) is one of the widely used questionnaires in the field of usability. The scale, which was adapted into Turkish by Erdinç in 2013, consists of 13 items in total. It has 4 sub-dimensions: system usefulness (items 1-6), information quality (items 7-9), interface quality (items 10-12) and general satisfaction (item 13). Each item is scored as 1 (Strongly agree) - 7 (Strongly disagree). The Cronbach α of the scale is > .70 and the Cronbach α value for each sub-dimension varies between .73 and .92. A minimum score of 13 and a maximum score of 91 can be obtained from the scale. A low score is defined as good usability, and the higher the score, the lower the usability quality of the system (Erdinç \& Lewis, 2013).
Student Information FormOther
In the form developed by the researchers in line with the literature, a total of 12 questions were included to determine the socio-demographic characteristics of the students (such as age, gender, academic average, whether they provide care to patients with chest tubes, whether they receive training on chest tube care). All participants in the experimental and control groups were applied once as a pre-test.
Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing StudentsOther
It is a comprehensive assessment tool developed by Huang Huiman (2018) to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students in Taiwan (Ho et al., 2021; H.-M. Huang et al., 2018). 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students' consists of 4 sub-dimensions. These sub-dimensions are 'awareness of clinical clues' (4 items), 'verification of clinical problems' (4 items), 'action determination and implementation' (4 items) and 'evaluation and reflection' (4 items). Each sub-dimension contains four items to assess students' clinical reasoning readiness levels. The lowest score that can be obtained from the scale is 16 and the highest score is 80. Responses to the scale are evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale (5=strongly agree, 4=agree, 3=decided, 2=disagree, 1=strongly disagree). Cronbach's α ranged from 0.894 for the total and 0.78 to 0.89 for each sub-dimension. The corrected item-total correlation is between 0.627-0.728. Higher scores indicate higher levels
Self-directed Learning ScaleOther
The original Self-Managed Learning Scale was used as a self-report scale by Lounsbury et. al. (2009). The Turkish adaptation and validity and reliability study of the scale, which shows the extent to which individuals learn autonomously with a one-dimensional structure, was conducted by Demircioğlu, Öge, Fuçular, Çevik, Nazlıgül, and Özçelik in 2018. The scale is 5-point Likert-type and consists of 10 items. For each item, participants are expected to respond according to 1 (Strongly disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (No opinion), 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly agree). Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale is 0.85. In line with the scores obtained from the scale, above average self-directed learning skill means high and below average self-directed learning skill means low (Demircioğlu et al., 2018). Both groups were applied as pre-test and post-test.
Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge TestOther
It was created by the researchers in line with the evidence in the literature (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Basler, 2020; Bertrandt et al., 2019; Charnock \& Evans, 2001; El-Senousy, Mahrous, Abd-Al Salam, \& Zedan, 2020; Ho et al., 2021; Tarhan et al., 2016; Zisis et al., 2015). The 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' was initially prepared as a total of 43 multiple-choice questions, including the headings and subheadings in each session (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Malone, 2015). Expert opinions were obtained from 5 faculty members with clinical experience and studies on chest tube care. The experts gave suitability scores to the knowledge test questions one by one on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1: The item is not suitable, 2: The item should be seriously revised, 3: Suitable should be slightly revised, 4: Suitable). In line with the suggestions from the experts, the questions were reorganised and 9 questions were removed. For the remaining 34 multiple-choice questions in the kno
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Experimental Group | Experimental | They completed the chest tube care management training programme which includes 5 modules, 4 case scenarios and interactive questions on www.gtbyep.com website. Receives: Other: Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short Version; Other: Student Information Form; Other: Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students; Other: Self-directed Learning Scale; Other: Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test |
| Control Group | Active comparator | The subject content of chest tube care management in the nursing education curriculum was given. After the pre- and post-tests were completed in the training programme in which the experimental group was included, the control group was also included in the training programme on www.gtbyep.com. The control group also completed the training content as applied to the experimental group. Receives: Other: Student Information Form; Other: Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students; Other: Self-directed Learning Scale; Other: Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students
It is a comprehensive assessment tool developed by Huang Huiman (2018) to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students in Taiwan (Huang et al., 2023). 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students' consists of 4 sub-dimensions. These sub-dimensions are 'awareness of clinical clues' (4 items), 'verification of clinical problems' (4 items), 'action determination and implementation' (4 items) and 'evaluation and reflection' (4 items). Each sub-dimension contains four items to assess students' clinical reasoning readiness levels. The lowest score that can be obtained from the scale is 16 and the highest score is 80. The responses to the scale are evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale (5=Strongly agree, 4=Agree, 3=Unsure, 2=Disagree, 1=Strongly disagree). Cronbach's α ranged from 0.894 for the total and 0.78 to 0.89 for each sub-dimension. The corrected item-total correlation is between 0.627-0.728.
Measured: In order to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students, it was applied to the students in the experimental and control groups before the application started and immediately after the application was completed.
Self-directed Learning Scale
The original Self-Managed Learning Scale was used by Lounsbury et al. (2009) as a self-report scale. The Turkish adaptation and validity and reliability study of the scale, which assesses the extent to which individuals learn autonomously with a one-dimensional structure, was conducted by Demircioğlu, Öge, Fuçular, Çevik, Nazlıgül, and Özçelik in 2018. The scale is 5-point Likert-type and consists of 10 items. For each item, participants are expected to respond according to 1 (Strongly disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (No opinion), 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly agree). Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale is 0.85. In line with the scores obtained from the scale, above average self-managed learning skill means high and below average self-managed learning skill means low (Demircioğlu et al., 2018). In this study, the cronbach alpha coefficient of 'Self-Managed Learning Scale' was found to be 0.915 in the pre-test and 0.890 in the post-test.
Measured: The Self-Managed Learning Scale was administered to the students in the experimental and control groups before and immediately after the implementation of the study.
Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test
The researchers created it in line with the evidence in the literature, including questions on Chest Tube Care Management (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Basler, 2020; Bertrandt et al., 2019). The 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' was initially prepared as a total of 43 multiple-choice questions including the headings and subheadings in each session (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Malone, 2015). Expert opinions were obtained from 5 faculty members with clinical experience and studies on chest tube care. The experts gave suitability scores to the knowledge test questions one by one on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1: The item is not suitable, 2: The item should be seriously revised, 3: Suitable should be slightly revised, 4: Suitable). In line with the suggestions from the experts, the questions were reorganized and 9 questions were removed.
Measured: The Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test was administered to the students in the experimental and control groups before and immediately after the implementation of the study.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire short version
Developed in 1995 by Lewis at IBM, the Computer System Usability Questionnaire (CSUQ) is one of the widely used questionnaires in the field of usability. The scale, which was adapted into Turkish by Erdinç in 2013, consists of 13 items in total. It has 4 sub-dimensions: system usefulness (items 1-6), information quality (items 7-9), interface quality (items 10-12) and general satisfaction (item 13). Each item is scored as 1 (Strongly agree) - 7 (Strongly disagree). The Cronbach α of the scale is > .70 and the Cronbach α value for each sub-dimension varies between .73 and .92. A minimum score of 13 and a maximum score of 91 can be obtained from the scale. A low score is defined as good usability, and the higher the score, the lower the usability quality of the system (Erdinç \& Lewis, 2013). In this study, Cronbach's alpha value of the scale was found to be 0.981.
Measured: It was applied to the students in the experimental group of the research after the implementation of the research was completed.
Chest Tube Care Management Training Programme Evaluation Form
This form was created by the researcher in line with the literature (Pires, 2023; Yüksel \& Kösterelioğlu, 2023). In order to evaluate the Chest Tube Care Management Training Programme, it was evaluated by SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis. In this direction, the researchers created 23 suggestions for the strengths of the training programme, 6 suggestions for the weaknesses, 8 suggestions for opportunities and 3 suggestions for threats. The form includes a total of 40 propositions in 11-point Likert type. The students were asked to give a score between 0 and 10 according to their level of agreement with each proposition (0 - I do not agree at all, 1 - I agree very little, 10 - I completely agree). The form also includes an open-ended question about the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and perceived threats of the training programme under each heading, with the option 'Other'.
Measured: It was applied to the students in the experimental group of the research after the implementation of the research was completed.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Dec 2024
- Study start13 Aug 2024
- Primary completion15 Aug 2024
- Study completion15 Sep 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for E-learningStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Gazi UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 108 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Gazi University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Atılım University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Sevil Güler, Gazi University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06745713
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- E-770082166-302.08.01-509027
- Acronym
- E-GTBYEP
- Status last verified
- Dec 2024
- First submitted
- 3 Dec 2024
- Last updated
- 20 Dec 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Data supporting this study are not publicly available due to ethical reasons but the datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available by emailing sevil.guler@gazi.edu.tr upon reasonable request.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Dec 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effectiveness of E-Learning Application Developed For Chest Tube Care in Nursing Students
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06745713
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- E-GTBYEP / E-770082166-302.08.01-509027
- Conditions
- E-learning, Nursing Care, Chest Tube, Nursing Education
- Keywords
- chest tube care, e-learning, nursing care, nursing students, clinical reasoning
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 108 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Gazi UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Atılım University
- Study start
- 13 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Sep 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the e-learning application developed for chest tube care in nursing students. Within the scope of this study, the e-learning application developed for chest tube care in nursing students and the effectiveness of this e-learning application were evaluated.
Detailed description
At the beginning of the study, 'Student Information Form', 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students', 'Self-Managed Learning Scale' and 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' were applied to the participants. Then, the students were divided into two groups, 54 in the experimental group and 54 in the control group, and they were provided to enter the 'Chest Tube Care Management E-Learning Application'. The students in the groups were then asked to complete the module containing activities such as videos, short tests, puzzles in the content of the e-learning application opened to them at different times. When the students in the groups completed the module, 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students', 'Self-Managed Learning Scale' and 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' were applied. Participation in this study was voluntary and participants could leave the study at any stage of the study if they wished. The confidentiality of the participant's data was protected and used only for this study.
Hypothesis 1:
H0: There is no significant difference between the chest tube care management knowledge scores of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
H1: There is a significant difference between the chest tube care management knowledge scores of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
Hypothesis 2:
H0: There is no significant difference between chest tube care management clinical reasoning readiness scale scores of students using chest tube care management e-learning application and control group students.
H1: There is a significant difference between the clinical reasoning readiness scale scores of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
Hypothesis 3:
H0: There is no significant difference between the chest tube care management self-directed learning skill levels of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
H1: There is a significant difference between the chest tube care management self-directed learning skill levels of the students using the chest tube care management e-learning application and the control group students.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Experimental Group | Experimental | Other: Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short Version, Other: Student Information Form, Other: Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students, Other: Self-directed Learning Scale, Other: Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge TestThey completed the chest tube care management training programme which includes 5 modules, 4 case scenarios and interactive questions on www.gtbyep.com website. |
| Control Group | Active comparator | Other: Student Information Form, Other: Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students, Other: Self-directed Learning Scale, Other: Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge TestThe subject content of chest tube care management in the nursing education curriculum was given. After the pre- and post-tests were completed in the training programme in which the experimental group was included, the control group was also included in the training programme on www.gtbyep.com. The control group also completed the training content as applied to the experimental group. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- 18 years of age or older,
- To be able to understand and speak Turkish,
- To be enrolled in the 3rd year of the Nursing Department,
- Taking Surgical Diseases Nursing course for the first time,
- To be able to access Internet,
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Notifying that he/she wants to leave the research at any stage of the research,
- They did not participate in any of the steps of the e-learning application such as pre-test, watching the videos, post-test, evaluation activities, etc.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short VersionDeveloped in 1995 by Lewis at IBM, the Computer System Usability Questionnaire (CSUQ) is one of the widely used questionnaires in the field of usability. The scale, which was adapted into Turkish by Erdinç in 2013, consists of 13 items in total. It has 4 sub-dimensions: system usefulness (items 1-6), information quality (items 7-9), interface quality (items 10-12) and general satisfaction (item 13). Each item is scored as 1 (Strongly agree) - 7 (Strongly disagree). The Cronbach α of the scale is > .70 and the Cronbach α value for each sub-dimension varies between .73 and .92. A minimum score of 13 and a maximum score of 91 can be obtained from the scale. A low score is defined as good usability, and the higher the score, the lower the usability quality of the system (Erdinç \& Lewis, 2013). | Other | Experimental Group |
| Student Information FormIn the form developed by the researchers in line with the literature, a total of 12 questions were included to determine the socio-demographic characteristics of the students (such as age, gender, academic average, whether they provide care to patients with chest tubes, whether they receive training on chest tube care). All participants in the experimental and control groups were applied once as a pre-test. | Other | Control Group, Experimental Group |
| Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing StudentsIt is a comprehensive assessment tool developed by Huang Huiman (2018) to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students in Taiwan (Ho et al., 2021; H.-M. Huang et al., 2018). 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students' consists of 4 sub-dimensions. These sub-dimensions are 'awareness of clinical clues' (4 items), 'verification of clinical problems' (4 items), 'action determination and implementation' (4 items) and 'evaluation and reflection' (4 items). Each sub-dimension contains four items to assess students' clinical reasoning readiness levels. The lowest score that can be obtained from the scale is 16 and the highest score is 80. Responses to the scale are evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale (5=strongly agree, 4=agree, 3=decided, 2=disagree, 1=strongly disagree). Cronbach's α ranged from 0.894 for the total and 0.78 to 0.89 for each sub-dimension. The corrected item-total correlation is between 0.627-0.728. Higher scores indicate higher levels | Other | Control Group, Experimental Group |
| Self-directed Learning ScaleThe original Self-Managed Learning Scale was used as a self-report scale by Lounsbury et. al. (2009). The Turkish adaptation and validity and reliability study of the scale, which shows the extent to which individuals learn autonomously with a one-dimensional structure, was conducted by Demircioğlu, Öge, Fuçular, Çevik, Nazlıgül, and Özçelik in 2018. The scale is 5-point Likert-type and consists of 10 items. For each item, participants are expected to respond according to 1 (Strongly disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (No opinion), 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly agree). Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale is 0.85. In line with the scores obtained from the scale, above average self-directed learning skill means high and below average self-directed learning skill means low (Demircioğlu et al., 2018). Both groups were applied as pre-test and post-test. | Other | Control Group, Experimental Group |
| Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge TestIt was created by the researchers in line with the evidence in the literature (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Basler, 2020; Bertrandt et al., 2019; Charnock \& Evans, 2001; El-Senousy, Mahrous, Abd-Al Salam, \& Zedan, 2020; Ho et al., 2021; Tarhan et al., 2016; Zisis et al., 2015). The 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' was initially prepared as a total of 43 multiple-choice questions, including the headings and subheadings in each session (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Malone, 2015). Expert opinions were obtained from 5 faculty members with clinical experience and studies on chest tube care. The experts gave suitability scores to the knowledge test questions one by one on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1: The item is not suitable, 2: The item should be seriously revised, 3: Suitable should be slightly revised, 4: Suitable). In line with the suggestions from the experts, the questions were reorganised and 9 questions were removed. For the remaining 34 multiple-choice questions in the kno | Other | Control Group, Experimental Group |
Primary outcome
Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students
Time frame: In order to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students, it was applied to the students in the experimental and control groups before the application started and immediately after the application was completed.
It is a comprehensive assessment tool developed by Huang Huiman (2018) to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students in Taiwan (Huang et al., 2023). 'Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students' consists of 4 sub-dimensions. These sub-dimensions are 'awareness of clinical clues' (4 items), 'verification of clinical problems' (4 items), 'action determination and implementation' (4 items) and 'evaluation and reflection' (4 items). Each sub-dimension contains four items to assess students' clinical reasoning readiness levels. The lowest score that can be obtained from the scale is 16 and the highest score is 80. The responses to the scale are evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale (5=Strongly agree, 4=Agree, 3=Unsure, 2=Disagree, 1=Strongly disagree). Cronbach's α ranged from 0.894 for the total and 0.78 to 0.89 for each sub-dimension. The corrected item-total correlation is between 0.627-0.728.
Self-directed Learning Scale
Time frame: The Self-Managed Learning Scale was administered to the students in the experimental and control groups before and immediately after the implementation of the study.
The original Self-Managed Learning Scale was used by Lounsbury et al. (2009) as a self-report scale. The Turkish adaptation and validity and reliability study of the scale, which assesses the extent to which individuals learn autonomously with a one-dimensional structure, was conducted by Demircioğlu, Öge, Fuçular, Çevik, Nazlıgül, and Özçelik in 2018. The scale is 5-point Likert-type and consists of 10 items. For each item, participants are expected to respond according to 1 (Strongly disagree), 2 (Disagree), 3 (No opinion), 4 (Agree) and 5 (Strongly agree). Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale is 0.85. In line with the scores obtained from the scale, above average self-managed learning skill means high and below average self-managed learning skill means low (Demircioğlu et al., 2018). In this study, the cronbach alpha coefficient of 'Self-Managed Learning Scale' was found to be 0.915 in the pre-test and 0.890 in the post-test.
Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test
Time frame: The Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test was administered to the students in the experimental and control groups before and immediately after the implementation of the study.
The researchers created it in line with the evidence in the literature, including questions on Chest Tube Care Management (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Basler, 2020; Bertrandt et al., 2019). The 'Chest Tube Care Management Knowledge Test' was initially prepared as a total of 43 multiple-choice questions including the headings and subheadings in each session (Abuejheisheh et al., 2021; Malone, 2015). Expert opinions were obtained from 5 faculty members with clinical experience and studies on chest tube care. The experts gave suitability scores to the knowledge test questions one by one on a 4-point Likert-type scale (1: The item is not suitable, 2: The item should be seriously revised, 3: Suitable should be slightly revised, 4: Suitable). In line with the suggestions from the experts, the questions were reorganized and 9 questions were removed.
2 secondary outcomes
Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire short version
Time frame: It was applied to the students in the experimental group of the research after the implementation of the research was completed.
Chest Tube Care Management Training Programme Evaluation Form
Time frame: It was applied to the students in the experimental group of the research after the implementation of the research was completed.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Dec 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Data supporting this study are not publicly available due to ethical reasons but the datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available by emailing sevil.guler@gazi.edu.tr upon reasonable request.
Related trials for E-learning
Not yet recruiting
QAIAx - SGI/SI Smart Health Cities: Microcity Enclave Program (Quantum SI/AGI Agency a/k/a AI City Hall Project - UPSTO App Nos. 64/074,526, 64/063,557, 64/105,164, 63/903,181, 63/729,428, 64/125,360; USPTO EO 9424 Assignment ID: 2101042 / ARN: REEL/FRAME: 76481/0026 - OUSD-R&E, Department of War)
Asperger's Disorder, Asperger Disorder
Recruiting
Impact of an E-Learning Coaching for Parents of Young Children With Autism
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Study to Learn About a Vaccine Against E Coli in Healthy Adults
Healthy Participants
Not yet recruiting
Effectiveness of GEMPO E-Education on Fathers' Self-Efficacy and Ability in Newborn Care
Fathers' Self-Efficacy and Ability in Newborn Care
Recruiting
Effectiveness of a Combined e-Learning and Virtual Reality Training Program for Healthcare Providers in Rheumatology
Rheumatic Diseases
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Turkish- Computer System Usability Questionnaire Short Version, Student Information Form and Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students in people with E-learning and Nursing Care, run by Gazi University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Dec 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Clinical Reasoning Readiness Scale for Nursing Students (time frame: In order to determine the clinical reasoning readiness levels of nursing students, it was applied to the students in the experimental and control groups before the application started and immediately after the application was completed.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Dec 2024.