Artifical IntelligenceNCT07897422
AI-Driven Video Avatars vs. Customized GPTs: Professional English Learning Among Nursing Students
A study testing Interactive AI Video Avatar and Personalized GPT Interface in people with Artifical Intelligence and Generative Artificial Intelligence, run by Manisa Celal Bayar University.
Trial summary
The goal of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two generative artificial intelligence technologies (an interactive AI video avatar vs. a personalized GPT) in enhancing professional English learning, overall tool satisfaction, and attitudes toward generative AI. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Artifical Intelligence, Generative Artificial Intelligence, Education, Nursing Students
- What is being tested?
- Interactive AI Video Avatar and Personalized GPT Interface
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 70 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 15 Oct 2026to 31 Jan 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Being an undergraduate nursing student currently enrolled in the "Professional English III" course at the Faculty of Health Sciences
- Possessing the necessary technological equipment (e.g., smartphone, tablet, or personal computer) to access and interact with the generative AI learning tools
- Volunteering to participate in the study
Who cannot join
- Prior experience with the specific AI tools developed or utilized in this study
- Concurrent participation in another research study involving AI-supported teaching or learning strategies
- Requesting to withdraw from the study at any point during the intervention period
About this study
Official title: AI-Driven Video Avatars vs. Customized GPTs: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Professional English Learning Among Nursing Students
The goal of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two generative artificial intelligence technologies (an interactive AI video avatar vs. a personalized GPT) in enhancing professional English learning, overall tool satisfaction, and attitudes toward generative AI. The study will be conducted in undergraduate third-year nursing students enrolled in a professional English course at a university health sciences faculty in Türkiye.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Read more
- Is there a significant difference in professional English knowledge test scores between nursing students using an interactive AI video avatar and those using a personalized GPT?
- Is there a significant difference in attitudes toward generative AI in English learning between students using the interactive AI video avatar and those using the personalized GPT?
- Is there a significant difference in satisfaction levels regarding the assigned AI educational tool between the two intervention groups? Researchers will compare students assigned to the Interactive AI Video Avatar Group (interacting with visual and auditory embodied avatars for face-to-face communication simulations) with students assigned to the Personalized GPT Group (interacting via a text/voice-based dialogue interface) to see if the interface modality affects learning performance, student satisfaction, and AI attitudes.
Participants will:
- Complete baseline questionnaires before the intervention, including a descriptive information form, a Professional English Knowledge Test, the Generative Artificial Intelligence Attitude Scale (GenAIAS), and a Generative AI Usage and Competence Scale.
- Use their randomly assigned AI teaching tool (interactive video avatar or personalized GPT) as a supplementary learning partner throughout the semester.
- Complete post-intervention evaluations at the end of the semester, including the Professional English Knowledge Test, GenAIAS, and an evaluation form to rate tool satisfaction.
- Being tested
- Interactive AI Video Avatar, Personalized GPT Interface
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Interactive AI Video AvatarOther
Participants will voluntarily use an interactive AI video avatar as a supplementary tool in their Professional English III course over a 15-week semester. The avatar provides visual and auditory simulations of clinical nursing communication.
Personalized GPT InterfaceOther
Participants will voluntarily use a personalized Large Language Model (GPT) interface configured to act as an adaptive, text- and voice-based learning partner integrated as a supplementary tool in the "Professional English III" nursing curriculum.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Interactive AI Video Avatar Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Interactive AI Video Avatar |
| Personalized GPT Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Personalized GPT Interface |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Professional English Knowledge Test Score
It is assessed by the Professional English Knowledge Test. It evaluates the professional English language proficiency of nursing students, covers clinical nursing terminology, nurse-patient therapeutic communication, patient education, and taking patient history. The test comprises 20 multiple-choice questions tailored to the course objectives. Higher total scores indicate greater professional English knowledge and language competency.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of application at 15 weeks
Change in Attitudes Toward Generative Artificial Intelligence in English Learning
It is assessed by the Generative Artificial Intelligence Attitude Scale for EFL Learners (GenAIAS). It assesses students' attitudes toward generative artificial intelligence in English learning. The scale comprises 33 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree), covering four sub-dimensions: Learning, Enjoyment, Usefulness, and Interest. The total score ranges from a minimum of 33 to a maximum of 165 points. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward generative AI in English language learning.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of application at 15 weeks
Secondary outcomes (1)
Overall Educational AI Tool Satisfaction
It is assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). It evaluates overall participant satisfaction with their assigned educational AI tool. Participants mark their response on a continuous line anchored from "very bad" (0 mm) to "very good" (100 mm). Higher scores indicate higher satisfaction with the assigned educational AI tool.
Measured: At the end of application at 15 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Oct 2026
- Study start15 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Artifical IntelligenceStudies 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Manisa Celal Bayar University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Aydan Baysan, Manisa Celal Bayar University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07897422
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- MCBU05.10.2026/20.478.486/4570
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 13 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 27 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- AI-Driven Video Avatars vs. Customized GPTs: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Professional English Learning Among Nursing Students
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07897422
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MCBU05.10.2026/20.478.486/4570
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Manisa Celal Bayar UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Jan 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 27 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 goal of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two generative artificial intelligence technologies (an interactive AI video avatar vs. a personalized GPT) in enhancing professional English learning, overall tool satisfaction, and attitudes toward generative AI. The study will be conducted in undergraduate third-year nursing students enrolled in a professional English course at a university health sciences faculty in Türkiye.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
- Is there a significant difference in professional English knowledge test scores between nursing students using an interactive AI video avatar and those using a personalized GPT?
- Is there a significant difference in attitudes toward generative AI in English learning between students using the interactive AI video avatar and those using the personalized GPT?
- Is there a significant difference in satisfaction levels regarding the assigned AI educational tool between the two intervention groups? Researchers will compare students assigned to the Interactive AI Video Avatar Group (interacting with visual and auditory embodied avatars for face-to-face communication simulations) with students assigned to the Personalized GPT Group (interacting via a text/voice-based dialogue interface) to see if the interface modality affects learning performance, student satisfaction, and AI attitudes.
Participants will:
- Complete baseline questionnaires before the intervention, including a descriptive information form, a Professional English Knowledge Test, the Generative Artificial Intelligence Attitude Scale (GenAIAS), and a Generative AI Usage and Competence Scale.
- Use their randomly assigned AI teaching tool (interactive video avatar or personalized GPT) as a supplementary learning partner throughout the semester.
- Complete post-intervention evaluations at the end of the semester, including the Professional English Knowledge Test, GenAIAS, and an evaluation form to rate tool satisfaction.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Interactive AI Video Avatar Group | Experimental | Other: Interactive AI Video Avatar |
| Personalized GPT Group | Experimental | Other: Personalized GPT Interface |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Being an undergraduate nursing student currently enrolled in the "Professional English III" course at the Faculty of Health Sciences
- Possessing the necessary technological equipment (e.g., smartphone, tablet, or personal computer) to access and interact with the generative AI learning tools
- Volunteering to participate in the study
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Prior experience with the specific AI tools developed or utilized in this study
- Concurrent participation in another research study involving AI-supported teaching or learning strategies
- Requesting to withdraw from the study at any point during the intervention period
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Interactive AI Video AvatarParticipants will voluntarily use an interactive AI video avatar as a supplementary tool in their Professional English III course over a 15-week semester. The avatar provides visual and auditory simulations of clinical nursing communication. | Other | Interactive AI Video Avatar Group |
| Personalized GPT InterfaceParticipants will voluntarily use a personalized Large Language Model (GPT) interface configured to act as an adaptive, text- and voice-based learning partner integrated as a supplementary tool in the "Professional English III" nursing curriculum. | Other | Personalized GPT Group |
Primary outcome
Change in Professional English Knowledge Test Score
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of application at 15 weeks
It is assessed by the Professional English Knowledge Test. It evaluates the professional English language proficiency of nursing students, covers clinical nursing terminology, nurse-patient therapeutic communication, patient education, and taking patient history. The test comprises 20 multiple-choice questions tailored to the course objectives. Higher total scores indicate greater professional English knowledge and language competency.
Change in Attitudes Toward Generative Artificial Intelligence in English Learning
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of application at 15 weeks
It is assessed by the Generative Artificial Intelligence Attitude Scale for EFL Learners (GenAIAS). It assesses students' attitudes toward generative artificial intelligence in English learning. The scale comprises 33 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree), covering four sub-dimensions: Learning, Enjoyment, Usefulness, and Interest. The total score ranges from a minimum of 33 to a maximum of 165 points. Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes toward generative AI in English language learning.
1 secondary outcome
Overall Educational AI Tool Satisfaction
Time frame: At the end of application at 15 weeks
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Oct 2026.
Related trials for Artifical Intelligence
Not yet recruiting
Chronic Pain Assessment Via AI-Powered Game
Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Technology Use, Safe Health Information, and Artificial Intelligence Among Older Adults
Older Adults, Nursing Homes
Not yet recruitingObservational study
MRI-Based Artificial Intelligence Prediction of Fluoroscopic C-Arm Angles for Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections
Lumbar Radicular Pain, Artifical Intelligence
RecruitingObservational study
Benchmarking Large Language Models Against Tumour Boards for Oncology Treatment Recommendations
Breast Neoplasms, Lung Neoplasms
Not yet recruitingObservational study
AI-Assisted 3D Reconstruction for Lung Resection Planning
Lung Cancer, Artifical Intelligence
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Interactive AI Video Avatar and Personalized GPT Interface in people with Artifical Intelligence and Generative Artificial Intelligence, run by Manisa Celal Bayar University.
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 3 inclusion and 3 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Oct 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Change in Professional English Knowledge Test Score (time frame: From enrollment to the end of application at 15 weeks). The study lists 2 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 27 Oct 2026.