MedTrace Logo

Effect of AI Critical Appraisal Training on Critical Thinking in Nursing Students

NCT07538986 · Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 400

Last updated 2026-04-20

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

This study is a cluster randomized controlled trial aimed at evaluating the impact of the "AI Critical Thinking Training" teaching method on the critical thinking, AI literacy, and clinical reasoning abilities of undergraduate nursing students. Random allocation methods (such as the coin-tossing method) were used to randomly assign eligible classes as a whole to either the experimental group or the control group. The experimental group received AI critical thinking training (using AI to analyze cases and annotate their errors), while the control group received the same amount of time in traditional case-based teaching. The research tools included the Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory, the AI Literacy Scale, the Clinical Reasoning Scale, and a standardized case analysis scoring sheet. Data collection was conducted twice, before the experiment (pre-test) and after the experiment (post-test). The protocol was based on mature educational theories, with a clear process and extremely low risk, demonstrating good scientific and feasibility. During the research process, if the participants felt any discomfort, they could immediately request to stop the research and withdraw from the study.

Conditions

  • Healthy

Interventions

BEHAVIORAL

AI Critical Appraisal Training

Over 8 weeks, students complete 4 case assignments. For each case, they interact with an AI tool, screenshot the full dialogue, and then critically annotate the AI's responses: identify at least 3 errors or debatable points, provide corrected answers with evidence from textbooks, and write a brief reflection.

BEHAVIORAL

Traditional Case-Based Learning

Over the same 8 weeks, students analyze identical surgical nursing cases by consulting printed and electronic resources (excluding AI). They submit written answers to case questions and a personal reflection, and declare no AI use.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Xi Cao

    lead OTHER

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Max Age
30 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2026-04-07
Primary Completion
2026-06-07
Completion
2027-04-02

Countries

  • China

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT07538986 on ClinicalTrials.gov