HealthyC-RCTNCT07538986
Effect of AI Critical Appraisal Training on Critical Thinking in Nursing Students
A study testing AI Critical Appraisal Training and Traditional Case-Based Learning in people with Healthy, run by Xi Cao at 1 site in China.
Trial 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. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 30 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- AI Critical Appraisal Training and Traditional Case-Based Learning
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 400 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 7 Apr 2026to 2 Apr 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 18 to 30 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- All full-time undergraduate nursing students currently enrolled, who are willing to participate in this study
Who cannot join
- Did not complete the survey questionnaire and did not take the final exam.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
China1 site
Chengdu Medical College
Chengdu, Sichuan, 610000
Xi Cao, +8613547042986, cx996523712@163.com
About this study
Official title: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Study on How AI Critical Appraisal Training Enhances Critical Thinking in Nursing Students
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
- Being tested
- AI Critical Appraisal Training, Traditional Case-Based Learning
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
AI Critical Appraisal TrainingBehavioural
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.
Traditional Case-Based LearningBehavioural
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.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| AI Critical Appraisal Training | Experimental | Students use AI tools to analyze surgical nursing cases and submit annotated reports identifying errors in AI-generated answers with justifications. Receives: Behavioral: Traditional Case-Based Learning |
| Traditional Case-Based Learning | Active comparator | Students receive the same cases but use traditional methods (textbooks, group discussion) without AI tools. Receives: Behavioral: AI Critical Appraisal Training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Critical Thinking Disposition
Measured by the Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CTDI-CV). The scale has 70 items, each rated on a 6-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 6=strongly agree). Total score ranges from 70 to 420. Higher scores indicate a stronger disposition toward critical thinking.
Measured: Baseline and Week 8
Secondary outcomes (3)
Change in AI Literacy
Measured by the Artificial Intelligence Literacy Scale for Chinese College Students (AILS-CCS). The scale has 15 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Total score ranges from 15 to 75. Higher scores indicate higher AI literacy.
Measured: Baseline and Week 8
Changes in clinical reasoning ability
Measured by the Chinese version of the Clinical Reasoning and Reflection Self-Assessment Scale. The scale has 26 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Total score ranges from 26 to 130. Higher scores indicate better clinical reasoning ability.
Measured: Baseline and Week 8
Case Analysis Performance
Assessed by a self-developed scoring rubric applied to the final case analysis report. Scores are evaluated by blinded assessors. The total score ranges from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better case analysis performance.
Measured: Week 8
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Apr 2026
- Study start7 Apr 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion7 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion2 Apr 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies 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
- 400 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Xi Cao
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Xi Cao, Chengdu Medical College
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07538986
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Chengdu Medical College
- Acronym
- C-RCT
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 6 Apr 2026
- Last updated
- 20 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Because this is a single-center study.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Study on How AI Critical Appraisal Training Enhances Critical Thinking in Nursing Students
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07538986
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- C-RCT / Chengdu Medical College
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 400 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Xi CaoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 7 Apr 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 7 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 2 Apr 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Apr 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 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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| AI Critical Appraisal Training | Experimental | Behavioral: Traditional Case-Based LearningStudents use AI tools to analyze surgical nursing cases and submit annotated reports identifying errors in AI-generated answers with justifications. |
| Traditional Case-Based Learning | Active comparator | Behavioral: AI Critical Appraisal TrainingStudents receive the same cases but use traditional methods (textbooks, group discussion) without AI tools. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 30 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- All full-time undergraduate nursing students currently enrolled, who are willing to participate in this study
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Did not complete the survey questionnaire and did not take the final exam.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| AI Critical Appraisal TrainingOver 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. | Behavioural | Traditional Case-Based Learning |
| Traditional Case-Based LearningOver 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. | Behavioural | AI Critical Appraisal Training |
Primary outcome
Change in Critical Thinking Disposition
Time frame: Baseline and Week 8
Measured by the Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CTDI-CV). The scale has 70 items, each rated on a 6-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree to 6=strongly agree). Total score ranges from 70 to 420. Higher scores indicate a stronger disposition toward critical thinking.
3 secondary outcomes
Change in AI Literacy
Time frame: Baseline and Week 8
Changes in clinical reasoning ability
Time frame: Baseline and Week 8
Case Analysis Performance
Time frame: Week 8
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 20 Apr 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Because this is a single-center study.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
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.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing AI Critical Appraisal Training and Traditional Case-Based Learning in people with Healthy, run by Xi Cao 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Apr 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?
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?
Contact Xi Cao (+8613808033721, cx996523712@163.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Critical Thinking Disposition (time frame: Baseline and Week 8). 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 20 Apr 2026.