CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02623530Updated Dec 8, 2015

Critical Thinking in Nursing Students

An interventional study of Educational intervention in Thinking, sponsored by University of Sao Paulo. Completed at 1 site in Brazil. Open to participants aged 17 Years to 50 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-12-08.

Sponsored by University of Sao Paulo · Not applicable and Interventional

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
102
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
17 Years to 50 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Considering the need for an intervention in the context of the Brazilian nursing education, in order to develop the skills and dispositions for critical thinking (CT), this study aims to fill this gap through a first aid course, comparing a group control and an experimental group. In this study will be used two tests, California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTID) to review arrangements for the CT, and California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) to evaluate CT skills, both marketed (Facione N, Facione PA, 2009 , 2011). Therefore, in order to facilitate the assimilation of PC skills during the course, we prepared the model of Active Teaching for Critical Thinking (MEAPC): characterized by a teaching method proposed by the author of this work, who understands the educational activity active and intentional as mobilizing higher mental processes fundamental to the development of the CT.

Read the detailed description

In Brazil there are few studies produced about Critical Thinking (CT), and the field of Brazilian nursing are unknown type of intervention research to assess / provisions initially measure and skills development / PC skills. Thus, the research question to be answered is: Students undergo an educational intervention focused on first aid care based on the Problem Based Learning (PBL) and guided by Active Teaching Model for Critical Thinking (MEAPC), have better results for PC skills and provisions compared to students learning the same content from PBL without MEAPC?

* STUDY OBJECTIVES

General Purpose:

Create, implement and evaluate an educational intervention for nursing students focusing on first aid, to develop skills and PC provisions, based on Problem Based Learning (PBL) and guided by Active Teaching Model for Critical Thinking (MEAPC) .

Specific Objectives:

  • Create an educational intervention focusing on first aid, to develop skills and PC provisions, through the PBL, guided by MEAPC (experimental group) and with PBL and without MEAPC (control group);
  • Apply the educational intervention focusing on first aid for the development of skills and PC provisions, through the PBL, guided by MEAPC (experimental group) and the PBL and without MEAPC (control group);
  • Evaluate the experimental group and control (before and immediately after the intervention) PC skills and dispositions, respectively, through the test California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) and California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST);
  • Compare possible differences between the two groups of students (experiment and control) in relation to age and sex;
  • Evaluate the effectiveness of MEAPC associated with PBL, comparing the performance of the experimental group and control;
  • Assess the educational intervention through knowledge of students using tests ten true and false statements (T or F test) applied before and immediately after the intervention.

STUDY ASSUMPTIONS

This study will be developed based on five assumptions, explained below:

  • Students who participate in the educational intervention focused on first aid care, based on the PBL-driven MEAPC will get better results in the test California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTID) and test California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST), which students attending the educational intervention aimed at answering first aid, based on the PBL, but not being guided by MEAPC;
  • Older students (22 and older) will get better results in the tests California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTID) and California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) than younger students (under 22 years) in the experiment and control groups;
  • There will be no significant differences regarding gender in relation to tests California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTID) and California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) compared the experimental and control groups;
  • The evaluation of educational intervention through knowledge of students using true and false statements test (V or F) applied before and immediately after the intervention, developed quantitative improvement in results.
02

Conditions studied

  • Thinking

Keywords

  • Nursing
  • Nursing education research
  • Critical thinking
  • Decision Making
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of Sao Paulo is the lead sponsor of 1,005 studies on the registry; 90 are open to participants now.

Of its 7 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
17 Years to 50 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Undergraduate nursing students who are enrolled from first to third year;
  • Undergraduate nursing students who agreed to participate in the study by signing the free and informed consent;
  • Undergraduate nursing students residing in the Zona da Mata of Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Undergraduate nursing students who are not enrolled from first to third year;
  • Undergraduate nursing students who does not agreed to participate in the study by signing the free and informed consent.
  • Undergraduate nursing students who does not residing in the Zona da Mata of Minas Gerais, Brazil.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
102 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Control group

    Control group: to implement educational intervention focusing on first aid for developing critical thinking (CT) skills and disposition, through the Problem Based Learning (PBL), not based on the Active Learning Model for Critical Thinking (MEAPC).

    Other: Educational intervention

  • Experimental
    Experimental group

    Experimental group: to implement educational intervention focusing on first aid for developing critical thinking (CT) skills and disposition, through the Problem Based Learning (PBL), based on the Active Learning Model for Critical Thinking (MEAPC).

    Other: Educational intervention

Interventions

  • OtherEducational intervention

    Control Group: An educational intervention focusing on first aid for the development of skills and dispositions of critical thinking. For this group will be taught the contents of first aid through the Methodology of PBL without the support MEAPC. Experimental Group: An educational intervention focusing on first aid for the development of skills and dispositions of critical thinking. For this group will be taught the contents of first aid through Methodology PBL, supported by the MEAPC.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST)

    It is now considered the main test for measurement of critical thinking skills. The test is divided into ranges that represent the skills of critical thinking, analysis, evaluation, inference, deduction, induction and general reasoning skills. The test has 34 questions (about five questions to assess each critical thinking skill) with four possible answers listed from A to D. Students must choose only one answer that they consider relevant to the question asked. The test filling time takes around 50 minutes.

    Time frame: one year

  2. California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTID)

    Have your items divided into seven scales that represent attitudes of the critical thinker: seeking the truth, open mind, analyticity, systematic, self-confidence, curiosity and cognitive maturity. The test has 75 assertions (about 11 for each assertive attitude) from which students must indicate their level of agreement or disagreement on a Likert scale of six points. The test filling time takes around 15 to 20 minutes.

    Time frame: one year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Evaluation of educational intervention

    The evaluation of educational intervention through knowledge of students using true and false statements test (V test or F).

    Time frame: one year

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Universidade Federal de Viçosa
    Viçosa, Minas Gerais 36036-900, Brazil
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — Data will be analyzed until June 2016, and subsequently arranged for publication.

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 8, 2015, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02623530
Lead sponsor
University of Sao Paulo
Responsible party
Fábio da Costa Carbogim (Phd student, University of Sao Paulo) — Principal investigator
First posted
Dec 7, 2015
Start date
Oct 2015
Primary completion
Oct 2015
Completion
Nov 2015
Last update
Dec 8, 2015

Study contacts

Vilanice F Püschel, Phd
study director · University of Sao Paulo

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2015. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion