Nursing EducationNCT07905040
GENERATİVE AI-SUPPORTED NURSİNG PROCESS EDUCATİON AND NURSİNG STUDENTS' LEARNİNG OUTCOMES
A study testing Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education and Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education in people with Nursing Education and Nursing Process, run by Istanbul Medipol University Hospital at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-supported education in teaching the nursing process on nursing students' learning outcomes. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Nursing Education, Nursing Process, Learning Outcome
- What is being tested?
- Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education and Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 173 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 27 Mar 2026to 25 Jun 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 Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Being enrolled in the Nursing Process course for the first time
- Having no physical, cognitive, or communicative impairment that would prevent participation in the artificial intelligence-supported education program
- Being informed about the study and volunteering to participate
Who cannot join
- Repeating the Nursing Process course
- Being a horizontal or vertical transfer student
- Not having completed the pretest measurements
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Istanbul Medipol University
Beykoz, Istanbul, 34810
About this study
Official title: EFFECT OF GENERATİVE ARTİFİCİAL INTELLİGENCE-SUPPORTED NURSİNG PROCESS EDUCATİON ON NURSİNG STUDENTS' LEARNİNG OUTCOMES: A RANDOMİZED CONTROLLED TRİAL
This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-supported education in teaching the nursing process on nursing students' learning outcomes. The study was conducted with undergraduate nursing students enrolled in the Nursing Process course for the first time at a foundation university in Istanbul, Türkiye. After a 7-week instructor-centered theoretical course, students were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group using computer-based simple randomization. Over three consecutive weeks, the intervention group worked on three patient case scenarios using a generative AI platform (Gemini), guided by pre-defined themes and prompts covering data collection, nursing diagnosis, planning, and implementation. The accuracy, consistency, and alignment of AI-generated responses with the nursing process steps were then discussed in class. During the same period, the control group completed three different case studies using the instructor's standard care plan template. Nursing process knowledge, self-efficacy in clinical performance, and clinical decision-making confidence and anxiety were measured before and after the intervention, and attitudes toward artificial intelligence and the course were measured after the intervention.
A total of 173 eligible students were randomized (intervention n = 85; control n = 88), and the study was completed with 140 students (intervention n = 68; control n = 72). Students who were repeating the course or were horizontal or vertical transfer students were excluded. The primary outcome was nursing process knowledge, measured with a researcher-developed Nursing Process Knowledge Test. Secondary outcomes were measured with the Self-Efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale, the Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision Making Scale, and the Attitude Toward Artificial Intelligence and Its Course Scale. Data were collected through electronic forms and analyzed using IBM SPSS 22.0.
- Being tested
- Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education, Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education
- Keywords
- Generative Artificial Intelligence, Nursing Process, Nursing Students, Nursing Education, Learning Outcomes, Self-Efficacy, Clinical Decision-Making, Anxiety, Randomized Controlled Trial
- Medical subject headings
- Anxiety Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process EducationBehavioural
Students used a generative AI platform for three consecutive weeks, working on one patient case per week (diabetic foot, hyponatremia, primiparous cesarean birth). Each case was analyzed through pre-defined themes and guiding prompts that covered the nursing process steps: data classification and interpretation, nursing diagnosis formulation and justification, prioritization, planning, and implementation. Students were expected to use only the prepared prompts and to report their analyses. AI-generated responses were then discussed in class for accuracy, consistency, and alignment with the nursing process steps. The intervention followed a 7-week instructor-centered theoretical course.
Case Study-Based Nursing Process EducationBehavioural
Students completed three different patient case studies over three consecutive weeks, one per week, as part of routine instruction. Each case study was completed using concept mapping, without the use of generative AI. The intervention followed the same 7-week instructor-centered theoretical course as the intervention group.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education | Experimental | Over three consecutive weeks, students worked on a different patient case scenario each week (week 1: diabetic foot; week 2: hyponatremia; week 3: primiparous cesarean birth) using a generative AI platform. Each week focused on a different step of the nursing process (week 1: data collection and assessment; week 2: nursing diagnosis; week 3: planning and implementation) and was guided by pre-defined themes and prompts. AI-generated responses were discussed in class for accuracy, consistency, and alignment with the nursing process steps. Receives: Behavioral: Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education |
| Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education | Active comparator | Over three consecutive weeks, students completed three different patient case studies, one each week, focusing on the nursing process steps (week 1: data collection and assessment; week 2: nursing diagnosis; week 3: planning and implementation), using concept mapping, without the use of generative AI. Receives: Behavioral: Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in nursing process knowledge score
Nursing process knowledge was measured with the researcher-developed Nursing Process Knowledge Test, a multiple-choice test covering data collection, nursing diagnosis, planning, implementation, and evaluation. Each question has four options and one correct answer. Correct answers are scored 1 and incorrect or blank answers 0. Total scores range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate a higher level of nursing process knowledge. The same test was administered at three time points.
Measured: Baseline (before the theoretical course), after the theoretical course (before randomization), and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Secondary outcomes (4)
Change in self-efficacy in clinical performance score
Self-efficacy in clinical performance was measured with the Self-Efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale (Cheraghi et al., 2009; Turkish version by Pozam and Zaybak, 2016). The scale has 37 items in four subscales: data collection, diagnosis and planning, implementation, and evaluation. Each item is rated from 0% (not sure) to 100% (completely sure). Higher scores indicate higher self-efficacy in clinical performance.
Measured: Baseline (before the theoretical course) and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Change in clinical decision-making confidence score
Confidence in clinical decision-making was measured with the confidence section of the Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision Making Scale (White, 2011; Turkish version by Bektas et al., 2017). The section has 27 items rated on a 6-point Likert scale; total scores range from 27 to 162. Higher scores indicate higher confidence in clinical decision-making.
Measured: Baseline (before the theoretical course) and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Change in clinical decision-making anxiety score
Anxiety in clinical decision-making was measured with the anxiety section of the Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision Making Scale (White, 2011; Turkish version by Bektas et al., 2017). The section has 27 items rated on a 6-point Likert scale; total scores range from 27 to 162. Lower scores indicate lower anxiety in clinical decision-making.
Measured: Baseline (before the theoretical course) and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Attitude toward artificial intelligence and the course score
Attitudes toward artificial intelligence and the course were measured with the Attitude Toward Artificial Intelligence and Its Course Scale (Suh and Ahn, 2022; Turkish version by Benzer et al., 2025). The scale has 22 items in three subscales (cognitive, affective, behavioral), rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate more positive attitudes.
Measured: Immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Oct 2026
- Study start27 Mar 2026
- Primary completion25 Jun 2026
- Study completion25 Jun 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Nursing EducationStudies 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
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 173 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Rabia Yaman Eren, Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07905040
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 21111991
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 27 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 29 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 29 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- EFFECT OF GENERATİVE ARTİFİCİAL INTELLİGENCE-SUPPORTED NURSİNG PROCESS EDUCATİON ON NURSİNG STUDENTS' LEARNİNG OUTCOMES: A RANDOMİZED CONTROLLED TRİAL
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07905040
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 21111991
- Keywords
- Generative Artificial Intelligence, Nursing Process, Nursing Students, Nursing Education, Learning Outcomes, Self-Efficacy, Clinical Decision-Making, Anxiety
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 173 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Istanbul Medipol University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 27 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 25 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 25 Jun 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 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.
This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effect of generative artificial intelligence (AI)-supported education in teaching the nursing process on nursing students' learning outcomes. The study was conducted with undergraduate nursing students enrolled in the Nursing Process course for the first time at a foundation university in Istanbul, Türkiye. After a 7-week instructor-centered theoretical course, students were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group using computer-based simple randomization. Over three consecutive weeks, the intervention group worked on three patient case scenarios using a generative AI platform (Gemini), guided by pre-defined themes and prompts covering data collection, nursing diagnosis, planning, and implementation. The accuracy, consistency, and alignment of AI-generated responses with the nursing process steps were then discussed in class. During the same period, the control group completed three different case studies using the instructor's standard care plan template. Nursing process knowledge, self-efficacy in clinical performance, and clinical decision-making confidence and anxiety were measured before and after the intervention, and attitudes toward artificial intelligence and the course were measured after the intervention.
A total of 173 eligible students were randomized (intervention n = 85; control n = 88), and the study was completed with 140 students (intervention n = 68; control n = 72). Students who were repeating the course or were horizontal or vertical transfer students were excluded. The primary outcome was nursing process knowledge, measured with a researcher-developed Nursing Process Knowledge Test. Secondary outcomes were measured with the Self-Efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale, the Nursing Anxiety and Self-Confidence with Clinical Decision Making Scale, and the Attitude Toward Artificial Intelligence and Its Course Scale. Data were collected through electronic forms and analyzed using IBM SPSS 22.0.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education | Experimental | Behavioral: Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process EducationOver three consecutive weeks, students worked on a different patient case scenario each week (week 1: diabetic foot; week 2: hyponatremia; week 3: primiparous cesarean birth) using a generative AI platform. Each week focused on a different step of the nursing process (week 1: data collection and assessment; week 2: nursing diagnosis; week 3: planning and implementation) and was guided by pre-defined themes and prompts. AI-generated responses were discussed in class for accuracy, consistency, and alignment with the nursing process steps. |
| Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education | Active comparator | Behavioral: Case Study-Based Nursing Process EducationOver three consecutive weeks, students completed three different patient case studies, one each week, focusing on the nursing process steps (week 1: data collection and assessment; week 2: nursing diagnosis; week 3: planning and implementation), using concept mapping, without the use of generative AI. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Being enrolled in the Nursing Process course for the first time
- Having no physical, cognitive, or communicative impairment that would prevent participation in the artificial intelligence-supported education program
- Being informed about the study and volunteering to participate
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Repeating the Nursing Process course
- Being a horizontal or vertical transfer student
- Not having completed the pretest measurements
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process EducationStudents used a generative AI platform for three consecutive weeks, working on one patient case per week (diabetic foot, hyponatremia, primiparous cesarean birth). Each case was analyzed through pre-defined themes and guiding prompts that covered the nursing process steps: data classification and interpretation, nursing diagnosis formulation and justification, prioritization, planning, and implementation. Students were expected to use only the prepared prompts and to report their analyses. AI-generated responses were then discussed in class for accuracy, consistency, and alignment with the nursing process steps. The intervention followed a 7-week instructor-centered theoretical course. | Behavioural | Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education |
| Case Study-Based Nursing Process EducationStudents completed three different patient case studies over three consecutive weeks, one per week, as part of routine instruction. Each case study was completed using concept mapping, without the use of generative AI. The intervention followed the same 7-week instructor-centered theoretical course as the intervention group. | Behavioural | Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education |
Primary outcome
Change in nursing process knowledge score
Time frame: Baseline (before the theoretical course), after the theoretical course (before randomization), and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Nursing process knowledge was measured with the researcher-developed Nursing Process Knowledge Test, a multiple-choice test covering data collection, nursing diagnosis, planning, implementation, and evaluation. Each question has four options and one correct answer. Correct answers are scored 1 and incorrect or blank answers 0. Total scores range from 0 to 10; higher scores indicate a higher level of nursing process knowledge. The same test was administered at three time points.
4 secondary outcomes
Change in self-efficacy in clinical performance score
Time frame: Baseline (before the theoretical course) and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Change in clinical decision-making confidence score
Time frame: Baseline (before the theoretical course) and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Change in clinical decision-making anxiety score
Time frame: Baseline (before the theoretical course) and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
Attitude toward artificial intelligence and the course score
Time frame: Immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention
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 29 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Nursing Education
Recruiting
The Effect of Web-Based Simulation and Flipped Learning on Blood Pressure Education
Education, Education Nursing
Recruiting
Environmental Sustainability-Focused Service-Learning for Nursing Students
Sustainable Consumption Behavior, Sustainability Attitudes
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of Health Belief Model-Based HPV Infection and Vaccination Education on University Students' Knowledge and Health Beliefs
Health Belief Model, Nursing Students
Not yet recruiting
Artificial Intelligence Powered Digital Education Based on the Neuman Systems Model for Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Radiotherap
Breast Cancer, Radiodermatitis
Active, not recruiting
Enhancing Male Nursing Students' Competence in Maternity Care: A Quasi-Experimental Study in Egypt
Maternity Nursing, Obstetric Nursing
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 Generative AI-Supported Nursing Process Education and Case Study-Based Nursing Process Education in people with Nursing Education and Nursing Process, run by Istanbul Medipol University Hospital 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 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 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 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?
Change in nursing process knowledge score (time frame: Baseline (before the theoretical course), after the theoretical course (before randomization), and immediately after completion of the 3-week intervention). 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 29 Oct 2026.