Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationNCT07914985
Application of Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Evaluation on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Nursing Interns
A study testing Teacher Video Feedback (TVF), Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) and Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) in people with Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, run by Tongji Hospital at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is an essential emergency skill for nursing interns. Traditional CPR skills assessment relies on on-site instructor evaluation, which can be time-consuming, labor-intensive, and limited by scheduling and location. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
- What is being tested?
- Teacher Video Feedback (TVF), Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) and Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 99 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 5 Jan 2026to 30 Mar 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
- participants to have an internship duration of more than 4 months, possess basic theoretical knowledge of CPR, and provide informed consent for voluntary participation in this study.
Who cannot join
- from the study if they missed training sessions or failed to complete the questionnaires.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
China1 site
Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology
Wuhan, Hubei
About this study
Official title: Application of Peer Video Feedback Combied With Teacher Evaluation on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Nursing Interns: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is an essential emergency skill for nursing interns. Traditional CPR skills assessment relies on on-site instructor evaluation, which can be time-consuming, labor-intensive, and limited by scheduling and location. Video-based feedback and peer feedback may provide more flexible approaches to skills assessment.
This study compared three CPR skills assessment approaches among 94 nursing interns at a tertiary general hospital in Wuhan, China, from January to March 2026. Participants were randomly allocated to three groups: teacher video feedback (TVF), peer video feedback combined with teacher video feedback (PVF\&TVF), and standard instructor feedback (SIF). The study compared CPR theoretical knowledge scores and practical skills scores among the three groups. Participants' perceptions of peer feedback and satisfaction with the assessment process were also evaluated.
The study aimed to assess the potential application of peer video feedback, alone or combined with teacher video feedback, in CPR skills assessment for nursing interns.
- Conditions
- Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
- Being tested
- Teacher Video Feedback (TVF), Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF), Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF)
- Keywords
- Peer video feedback, Teacher evaluation, Nursing interns, Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, Skills assessment
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Teacher Video Feedback (TVF)Behavioural
First, the trainees independently practiced using an advanced life support manikin. The system provided a standard video of CPR operations for students to compare their performance. Subsequently, each group member independently recorded an assessment video and uploaded it via their mobile devices. Two teachers completed the online scoring within two days.
Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF)Behavioural
The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to compare with their own performance. Subsequently, each student recorded and uploaded their CPR operation video, and the system automatically grouped students who participated in peer feedback into teams of four. Students assigned to participate in peer feedback scored the assessment videos of other members within their group based on the scoring rubric in the system. Two teachers completed the scoring of the uploaded videos within two days, and the system automatically aggregated the scoring data.
Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF)Behavioural
The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to practice, utilizing a traditional offline assessment mode, with two instructors scoring on-site.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Teacher Video Feedback (TVF) | Experimental | First, the trainees independently practiced using an advanced life support manikin. The system provided a standard video of CPR operations for students to compare their performance. Subsequently, each group member independently recorded an assessment video and uploaded it via their mobile devices. Two teachers completed the online scoring within two days. Receives: Behavioral: Teacher Video Feedback (TVF) |
| Peer and Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) | Experimental | The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to compare with their own performance. Subsequently, each student recorded and uploaded their CPR operation video, and the system automatically grouped students who participated in peer feedback into teams of four. Students assigned to participate in peer feedback scored the assessment videos of other members within their group based on the scoring rubric in the system. Two teachers completed the scoring of the uploaded videos within two days, and the system automatically aggregated the scoring data. Receives: Behavioral: Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) |
| Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) | Active comparator | The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to practice, utilizing a traditional offline assessment mode, with two instructors scoring on-site. Receives: Behavioral: Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
CPR Practical Skills Score
Score of clinical skill assessment; score range: 0-100; higher scores indicate better clinical performance. Measured by teacher and peer rating. For the TVF group, the final score is the average score from two online teachers. For the PVF \& TVF group, the final score is a weighted average (60% from two teachers' scores, 40% from three peers' average scores). For the SIF group, the final score is the average score from two on-site teachers.
Measured: Immediately after completion of the CPR skills assessment
Secondary outcomes (3)
CPR Theoretical Knowledge Score
Score of CPR theoretical knowledge assessment; score range: 0-100; higher scores indicate better theoretical knowledge mastery. Measured using a self-developed CPR theoretical knowledge test paper compiled by the teaching team. The test contains fill-in-the-blank and multiple-choice questions (7 items in total), with a passing threshold of ≥80 points and a 10-minute time limit. The online assessment is delivered and collected via Questionnaire Star after the skill assessment.
Measured: On the same day as the CPR skills assessment
Students' Perceptions of Peer Video Feedback
Score of the adapted Perceptions of Peer Assessment Scale; score range: 1-7; higher scores indicate stronger agreement. Measured using the adapted Perceptions of Peer Assessment Scale. The pre-participation version includes 10 items (Cronbach's α = 0.76), and the post-participation version includes 15 items (Cronbach's α = 0.89), rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). The scale evaluates perceived ability for peer feedback, clarity of assessment instructions, peer assessment responsibility, preparation, learning gains, and subjectivity relative to teacher assessment. Two open-ended questions are included to collect perceived advantages and limitations of peer video feedback.
Measured: Before and within one week after participation in the peer video feedback process
Satisfaction With the Peer Video Feedback Assessment Process
Score of self-designed peer video feedback satisfaction questionnaire; score range: 1-7; higher scores indicate higher satisfaction. Measured using a self-designed 6-item satisfaction questionnaire rated on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Items cover understanding of peer feedback, suitability of peer assessment, appropriateness of student evaluation, fairness of scoring, reflection of effort, and fairness of peer feedback. A total of 32 questionnaires were distributed and recovered, with a response rate of 100%.
Measured: Within one week after the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Nov 2026
- Study start5 Jan 2026
- Primary completion30 Mar 2026
- Study completion30 Mar 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Tongji HospitalThe 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
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 99 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Tongji Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Hexifei, Tongji Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07914985
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- TJ-IRB202507020
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 16 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 4 Nov 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be shared because of privacy and confidentiality considerations involving nursing interns' educational assessment scores and questionnaire responses.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Nov 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Application of Peer Video Feedback Combied With Teacher Evaluation on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Nursing Interns: a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07914985
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TJ-IRB202507020
- Conditions
- Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
- Keywords
- Peer video feedback, Teacher evaluation, Nursing interns, Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, Skills assessment
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 99 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Tongji HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 5 Jan 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Mar 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Nov 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.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is an essential emergency skill for nursing interns. Traditional CPR skills assessment relies on on-site instructor evaluation, which can be time-consuming, labor-intensive, and limited by scheduling and location. Video-based feedback and peer feedback may provide more flexible approaches to skills assessment.
This study compared three CPR skills assessment approaches among 94 nursing interns at a tertiary general hospital in Wuhan, China, from January to March 2026. Participants were randomly allocated to three groups: teacher video feedback (TVF), peer video feedback combined with teacher video feedback (PVF\&TVF), and standard instructor feedback (SIF). The study compared CPR theoretical knowledge scores and practical skills scores among the three groups. Participants' perceptions of peer feedback and satisfaction with the assessment process were also evaluated.
The study aimed to assess the potential application of peer video feedback, alone or combined with teacher video feedback, in CPR skills assessment for nursing interns.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Teacher Video Feedback (TVF) | Experimental | Behavioral: Teacher Video Feedback (TVF)First, the trainees independently practiced using an advanced life support manikin. The system provided a standard video of CPR operations for students to compare their performance. Subsequently, each group member independently recorded an assessment video and uploaded it via their mobile devices. Two teachers completed the online scoring within two days. |
| Peer and Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) | Experimental | Behavioral: Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF)The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to compare with their own performance. Subsequently, each student recorded and uploaded their CPR operation video, and the system automatically grouped students who participated in peer feedback into teams of four. Students assigned to participate in peer feedback scored the assessment videos of other members within their group based on the scoring rubric in the system. Two teachers completed the scoring of the uploaded videos within two days, and the system automatically aggregated the scoring data. |
| Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) | Active comparator | Behavioral: Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF)The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to practice, utilizing a traditional offline assessment mode, with two instructors scoring on-site. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- participants to have an internship duration of more than 4 months, possess basic theoretical knowledge of CPR, and provide informed consent for voluntary participation in this study.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- from the study if they missed training sessions or failed to complete the questionnaires.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Teacher Video Feedback (TVF)First, the trainees independently practiced using an advanced life support manikin. The system provided a standard video of CPR operations for students to compare their performance. Subsequently, each group member independently recorded an assessment video and uploaded it via their mobile devices. Two teachers completed the online scoring within two days. | Behavioural | Teacher Video Feedback (TVF) |
| Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF)The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to compare with their own performance. Subsequently, each student recorded and uploaded their CPR operation video, and the system automatically grouped students who participated in peer feedback into teams of four. Students assigned to participate in peer feedback scored the assessment videos of other members within their group based on the scoring rubric in the system. Two teachers completed the scoring of the uploaded videos within two days, and the system automatically aggregated the scoring data. | Behavioural | Peer and Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) |
| Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF)The system provided a standard CPR operation video for students to practice, utilizing a traditional offline assessment mode, with two instructors scoring on-site. | Behavioural | Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) |
Primary outcome
CPR Practical Skills Score
Time frame: Immediately after completion of the CPR skills assessment
Score of clinical skill assessment; score range: 0-100; higher scores indicate better clinical performance. Measured by teacher and peer rating. For the TVF group, the final score is the average score from two online teachers. For the PVF \& TVF group, the final score is a weighted average (60% from two teachers' scores, 40% from three peers' average scores). For the SIF group, the final score is the average score from two on-site teachers.
3 secondary outcomes
CPR Theoretical Knowledge Score
Time frame: On the same day as the CPR skills assessment
Students' Perceptions of Peer Video Feedback
Time frame: Before and within one week after participation in the peer video feedback process
Satisfaction With the Peer Video Feedback Assessment Process
Time frame: Within one week after the 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 4 Nov 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be shared because of privacy and confidentiality considerations involving nursing interns' educational assessment scores and questionnaire responses.
Related trials for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
Not yet recruiting
Compression-Only Versus Standard Basic Life Support Training in Nursing Students
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Not yet recruiting
Execution of Prehospital Transesophageal Echocardiography During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients With Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest
Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA)
Active, not recruiting
The REVIVE-PEEP Trial: Positive End-expiratory Pressure Versus Sham Valve/Zero End-expiratory Pressure in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During Manual Ventilation to Improve Neurological Outcomes at Discharge in Adult Patients Suffering an Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest
Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital
Active, not recruiting
RACE-CARS - RAndomized Cluster Evaluation of Cardiac ARrest Systems
Cardiac Arrest
RecruitingObservational study
Cardiac Arrest - Ultrasound Detection of Occult Perfusion
Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital, Hypotension
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 Teacher Video Feedback (TVF), Peer Video Feedback Combined With Teacher Video Feedback (PVF&TVF) and Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) in people with Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, run by Tongji Hospital at 1 site in China.
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 4 Nov 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 China. 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?
CPR Practical Skills Score (time frame: Immediately after completion of the CPR skills assessment). 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 4 Nov 2026.