Implicit BiasCBTsimNCT07886931
Counter Bias Training Simulation Healthcare
A study testing CBTsim and bias documentary in people with Implicit Bias, run by Washington State University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The overall goal of this project was to develop and evaluate Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) Healthcare - an anti-bias training program that is specific for healthcare professionals. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Implicit Bias
- What is being tested?
- CBTsim and bias documentary
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 91 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 5 Nov 2025to 31 Jan 2026
- 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
- Registered nurse working full time at the test hospital
Who cannot join
- Not a registered nurse working full time at the test hospital
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Washington State University
Spokane, Washington, 99202
About this study
Official title: Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) Healthcare: A Novel Approach for Reducing the Impact of Implicit Bias on Healthcare Delivery
The overall goal of this project was to develop and evaluate Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) Healthcare - an anti-bias training program that is specific for healthcare professionals. First, a culturally diverse team developed CBTsim Healthcare scenarios based on an extensive review of the literature on healthcare disparities. Then, a randomized control trial was conducted with 91 nurses to test the effectiveness of CBTsim Healthcare. Nurses received approximately 2 hours of baseline testing, then 51 nurses (treatment group) received approximately 3 hours of CBTsim Healthcare training and the other 40 nurses (control group) watched a 90-minute documentary on bias, information which is more typical of current standard practice. Then, all 91 nurses received approximately 2 hours of post-intervention testing. Baseline testing included a demographic questionnaire, a prejudiced belief assessment scale, and three written patient care scenarios in which decisions and communications to the patient were documented. Post-intervention testing included a survey to assess engagement with the training, the same prejudiced belief assessment scale, and three different patient care scenarios. Three months after the intervention participants were surveyed to gather qualitative feedback on beliefs about training effectiveness and how it had impacted patient care. Finally, Press Ganey scores from the hospital (patient satisfaction with nursing care) were analyzed for a 3-month period before the intervention and again after the intervention to try and determine whether the training had a measurable impact on patient care in the hospital.
Read the detailed description
"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman because it often results in physical death." - Martin Luther King Jr. One cause of this injustice is bias in healthcare delivery resulting in minority health disparities. Biases that are explicit (such as blatant prejudice or bigotry) are rare among healthcare professionals, but implicit biases (unconscious ways in which beliefs, attitudes, and values influence perceptions of the world and the people in it) are systemic and widespread. Implicit bias is the unconscious or semiconscious attribution of particular qualities to members of a particular social group. For example, associating African Americans with criminality, LGBTQ+ members with perversion, or people suffering homelessness with drug seeking. Biases such as these can lead to damaged patient-clinician relationships (PCR), discriminate administration of treatment such as pain medication, and consequent health disparities that are extreme and inexcusable. Innovative methods for reducing the impact of implicit bias on PCR and consequent minority health disparities are critical.
The research team has developed Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim), an innovative and unique training program that uses simulation to make trainees aware of implicit biases and learn to overcome or "counter" them. A version has been developed, tested, and demonstrated a reduction in bias for police officers. CBTsim has great relevance to healthcare, for which existing implicit bias trainings are typically lecture based, and may be ineffective at reducing the impact of bias on PCR. A health care version of CBTsim would differ from existing programs by integrating bias awareness and reduction into actual patient care and communication skills via simulation, and could have a revolutionary impact on reducing bias in PCR nationwide. As such, this study developed "CBTsim Healthcare" and evaluated its effectiveness at reducing bias in PCR and subsequent minority healthcare disparities.
This study was jointly conducted in the Washington State University College of Nursing Simulation Lab (aims 1 and 2) and Providence Medical Center (aim 3) in Spokane WA. First, a culturally diverse team developed CBTsim Healthcare scenarios based on an extensive review of the literature on healthcare disparities. Then, a randomized control trial was conducted with 91 nurses to test the effectiveness of CBTsim Healthcare. Nurses received 2 hours of baseline testing, then 50 nurses (treatment group) received a 4-hour CBTsim Healthcare training and the other 41 nurses (control group) watched a 90 minute implicit bias documentary, more typical of current standard practice. Then, all 91 nurses received 2 hours of post-intervention testing. Testing included a demographic questionnaire, a scale to measure biased attitudes, patient care scenarios, and feedback on perceived training effectiveness. Nurses were then assessed for patient satisfaction using Press Ganey scores. Using this innovative design, Specific Aims were:
Aim 1: Measure the impact of CBTsim Healthcare on nurse implicit bias and prejudice.
Aim 2: Analyze the impact of CBTsim Healthcare on nurse interactions with patients in hypothetical scenarios.
Aim 3: Evaluate the impact of CBTsim Healthcare on disparities in patient satisfaction with healthcare in the hospital setting.
All major health agencies have identified minority health disparities as a matter of extreme urgency. The economic impact is an estimated $230 billion a year,32 and the social justice impact is immeasurable. Implicit bias and its impact on PCR is a cornerstone of systemic inequity, and it is one that can be feasibly addressed.
- Conditions
- Implicit Bias
- Being tested
- CBTsim, bias documentary
- Keywords
- Implicit Bias, Patient Clinician Relationships, Health Equity, Health Disparities
- Medical subject headings
- Bias, Implicit
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
CBTsimBehavioural
Experimental: CBTsim is a simulation based implicit bias training platform
bias documentaryBehavioural
A documentary about unconscious bias
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) - an anti bias training intervention for healthcare | Experimental | The way CBTsim works is that trainees respond to video scenarios (for example a pediatric scenario where a mother is concerned about her 11 year old son who is being bullied) that are filmed with multiple outcomes-in other words they could end very positively (the patient is pleased at the outcome), or very negatively (the patient is upset and frustrated with nursing care). The scenarios within CBTsim are carefully created so that multiple types of demographics that could elicit bias are represented (for example citizens of different races / ethnicities, ages, genders, and socio-economic status). One by one, trainees respond to scenarios, then reflect on why they made the decisions that they made (e.g., their interactions) during a facilitator-guided debrief. Peers are encouraged to volunteer their perspectives, which strengthens learning while trainees await their turn to respond to a scenario. Receives: Behavioral: CBTsim |
| bias documentary | Active comparator | The bias documentary is about the science of implicit or unconscious bias in the work place, including policing, sports, healthcare, tech industry, and others. Receives: Behavioral: bias documentary |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patient care scenarios
Participants were asked to respond to three patient care scenarios and scored on their responses - scores ranged from 30-90 with higher scores indicating better (more equitable) performance
Measured: Baseline and immediately post intervention
Stereotypical Attitudes
The stereotypical attitudes scale has four sections (race, gender, LGBTQ, socio-economic status) where participants are asked to rate their agreement with certain stereotypically held beliefs. Scores range from 20-100 and higher scores on the scale indicate more stereotypical attitudes.
Measured: Baseline and immediately post intervention
Nurse engagement
Nurses were asked to respond "yes" or "no" to various questions about whether they believed the training was engaging, beneficial for reducing bias, and whether they believed it will help them in the hospital setting
Measured: Immediate post intervention
Press Ganey Scores
Standardized patient satisfaction metrics, rating care on a scale from 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good)
Measured: Three months pre intervention and three months post intervention
Qualitative feedback
Nurses were asked to comment on how they believed the training had impacted their patient care
Measured: 3 month post intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Oct 2026
- Study start5 Nov 2025
- Primary completion31 Jan 2026
- Study completion31 Jan 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Implicit BiasStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 91 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Washington State University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07886931
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- f6awyp37
- Acronym
- CBTsim
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 29 Sep 2026
- Last updated
- 21 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) Healthcare: A Novel Approach for Reducing the Impact of Implicit Bias on Healthcare Delivery
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07886931
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CBTsim / f6awyp37
- Conditions
- Implicit Bias
- Keywords
- Implicit Bias, Patient Clinician Relationships, Health Equity, Health Disparities
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 91 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Washington State UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 5 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jan 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Jan 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Oct 2026 (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.
The overall goal of this project was to develop and evaluate Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) Healthcare - an anti-bias training program that is specific for healthcare professionals. First, a culturally diverse team developed CBTsim Healthcare scenarios based on an extensive review of the literature on healthcare disparities. Then, a randomized control trial was conducted with 91 nurses to test the effectiveness of CBTsim Healthcare. Nurses received approximately 2 hours of baseline testing, then 51 nurses (treatment group) received approximately 3 hours of CBTsim Healthcare training and the other 40 nurses (control group) watched a 90-minute documentary on bias, information which is more typical of current standard practice. Then, all 91 nurses received approximately 2 hours of post-intervention testing. Baseline testing included a demographic questionnaire, a prejudiced belief assessment scale, and three written patient care scenarios in which decisions and communications to the patient were documented. Post-intervention testing included a survey to assess engagement with the training, the same prejudiced belief assessment scale, and three different patient care scenarios. Three months after the intervention participants were surveyed to gather qualitative feedback on beliefs about training effectiveness and how it had impacted patient care. Finally, Press Ganey scores from the hospital (patient satisfaction with nursing care) were analyzed for a 3-month period before the intervention and again after the intervention to try and determine whether the training had a measurable impact on patient care in the hospital.
Detailed description
"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman because it often results in physical death." - Martin Luther King Jr. One cause of this injustice is bias in healthcare delivery resulting in minority health disparities. Biases that are explicit (such as blatant prejudice or bigotry) are rare among healthcare professionals, but implicit biases (unconscious ways in which beliefs, attitudes, and values influence perceptions of the world and the people in it) are systemic and widespread. Implicit bias is the unconscious or semiconscious attribution of particular qualities to members of a particular social group. For example, associating African Americans with criminality, LGBTQ+ members with perversion, or people suffering homelessness with drug seeking. Biases such as these can lead to damaged patient-clinician relationships (PCR), discriminate administration of treatment such as pain medication, and consequent health disparities that are extreme and inexcusable. Innovative methods for reducing the impact of implicit bias on PCR and consequent minority health disparities are critical.
The research team has developed Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim), an innovative and unique training program that uses simulation to make trainees aware of implicit biases and learn to overcome or "counter" them. A version has been developed, tested, and demonstrated a reduction in bias for police officers. CBTsim has great relevance to healthcare, for which existing implicit bias trainings are typically lecture based, and may be ineffective at reducing the impact of bias on PCR. A health care version of CBTsim would differ from existing programs by integrating bias awareness and reduction into actual patient care and communication skills via simulation, and could have a revolutionary impact on reducing bias in PCR nationwide. As such, this study developed "CBTsim Healthcare" and evaluated its effectiveness at reducing bias in PCR and subsequent minority healthcare disparities.
This study was jointly conducted in the Washington State University College of Nursing Simulation Lab (aims 1 and 2) and Providence Medical Center (aim 3) in Spokane WA. First, a culturally diverse team developed CBTsim Healthcare scenarios based on an extensive review of the literature on healthcare disparities. Then, a randomized control trial was conducted with 91 nurses to test the effectiveness of CBTsim Healthcare. Nurses received 2 hours of baseline testing, then 50 nurses (treatment group) received a 4-hour CBTsim Healthcare training and the other 41 nurses (control group) watched a 90 minute implicit bias documentary, more typical of current standard practice. Then, all 91 nurses received 2 hours of post-intervention testing. Testing included a demographic questionnaire, a scale to measure biased attitudes, patient care scenarios, and feedback on perceived training effectiveness. Nurses were then assessed for patient satisfaction using Press Ganey scores. Using this innovative design, Specific Aims were:
Aim 1: Measure the impact of CBTsim Healthcare on nurse implicit bias and prejudice.
Aim 2: Analyze the impact of CBTsim Healthcare on nurse interactions with patients in hypothetical scenarios.
Aim 3: Evaluate the impact of CBTsim Healthcare on disparities in patient satisfaction with healthcare in the hospital setting.
All major health agencies have identified minority health disparities as a matter of extreme urgency. The economic impact is an estimated $230 billion a year,32 and the social justice impact is immeasurable. Implicit bias and its impact on PCR is a cornerstone of systemic inequity, and it is one that can be feasibly addressed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) - an anti bias training intervention for healthcare | Experimental | Behavioral: CBTsimThe way CBTsim works is that trainees respond to video scenarios (for example a pediatric scenario where a mother is concerned about her 11 year old son who is being bullied) that are filmed with multiple outcomes-in other words they could end very positively (the patient is pleased at the outcome), or very negatively (the patient is upset and frustrated with nursing care). The scenarios within CBTsim are carefully created so that multiple types of demographics that could elicit bias are represented (for example citizens of different races / ethnicities, ages, genders, and socio-economic status). One by one, trainees respond to scenarios, then reflect on why they made the decisions that they made (e.g., their interactions) during a facilitator-guided debrief. Peers are encouraged to volunteer their perspectives, which strengthens learning while trainees await their turn to respond to a scenario. |
| bias documentary | Active comparator | Behavioral: bias documentaryThe bias documentary is about the science of implicit or unconscious bias in the work place, including policing, sports, healthcare, tech industry, and others. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Registered nurse working full time at the test hospital
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Not a registered nurse working full time at the test hospital
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 |
|---|---|---|
| CBTsimExperimental: CBTsim is a simulation based implicit bias training platform | Behavioural | Counter Bias Training Simulation (CBTsim) - an anti bias training intervention for healthcare |
| bias documentaryA documentary about unconscious bias | Behavioural | bias documentary |
Primary outcome
Patient care scenarios
Time frame: Baseline and immediately post intervention
Participants were asked to respond to three patient care scenarios and scored on their responses - scores ranged from 30-90 with higher scores indicating better (more equitable) performance
Stereotypical Attitudes
Time frame: Baseline and immediately post intervention
The stereotypical attitudes scale has four sections (race, gender, LGBTQ, socio-economic status) where participants are asked to rate their agreement with certain stereotypically held beliefs. Scores range from 20-100 and higher scores on the scale indicate more stereotypical attitudes.
Nurse engagement
Time frame: Immediate post intervention
Nurses were asked to respond "yes" or "no" to various questions about whether they believed the training was engaging, beneficial for reducing bias, and whether they believed it will help them in the hospital setting
Press Ganey Scores
Time frame: Three months pre intervention and three months post intervention
Standardized patient satisfaction metrics, rating care on a scale from 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good)
Qualitative feedback
Time frame: 3 month post intervention
Nurses were asked to comment on how they believed the training had impacted their patient care
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 21 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Implicit Bias
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Implicit Bias in Intensive Care: Analysis and Assessment.
Intensive Care
Recruiting
Interprofessional Simulation Program for Clinical Resilience and Empathy: Project INSPIRE
Substance Use Disorders, Simulation Training
Recruiting
Accountability for Care Through Undoing Racism & Equity for Moms
Pregnancy Related, Maternal Health
Enrolling by invitation
Evaluating Simulation Experiences to Help Navigate Racism and Hidden Bias
Implicit Bias
Enrolling by invitation
Virtual Reality to Combat Weight-Based Implicit Bias: BWH Pilot Study
Implicit Bias, Implicit Association Test
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 CBTsim and bias documentary in people with Implicit Bias, run by Washington State University at 1 site in United States.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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 21 Oct 2026. 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 United States. 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?
Patient care scenarios (time frame: Baseline and immediately post intervention). The study lists 5 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 21 Oct 2026.