CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT06615219Updated Oct 15, 2024

Intergroup Contact Intervention for Nursing Undergraduates to Improve Aging Stereotype

An interventional study of Intergroup contact training and Regular course training only in Aging and Ageism, sponsored by Huzhou University. Completed at 1 site in China. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-10-15.

Sponsored by Huzhou University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 2 years 3 months after the study started (first participant enrolled May 2022, registered Aug 2024).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
126
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study aimed to investigate the effects of intergroup contact training on the levels of aging stereotypes, intergroup anxiety, and willingness to engage in geriatric nursing work among undergraduate nursing students.

Read the detailed description

This research was designed as a pre-test-post-test randomized controlled experimental study. Nursing students from a university in Hangzhou, China served as the research subjects, who were randomly assigned to the experimental or control group. The control group received training in the regular course and was given compensatory intervention after the experiment, while the experimental group received intergroup contact training (the regular course combined with intergroup contact content). Such training was carried out in the forms of both individual and group interventions for a duration of 12 weeks. The levels of aging stereotypes, intergroup anxiety, and the willingness to engage in geriatric nursing among the nursing students were investigated before and after the training. Number, percentage, mean, standard deviation, Shapiro-Wilk, T-test, Wilcoxon signed ranks tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyze the data.

02

Conditions studied

  • Aging
  • Ageism
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Huzhou University is the lead sponsor of 6 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • full-time undergraduate students enrolled in the nursing program
  • not yet enrolled in a geriatric nursing course
  • agreed to participate in this study and signed an informed consent form

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • students in the nursing program pursuing a bachelor degree through a vocational-to-degree pathway
  • Students who have taken a break from their studies
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Health services research
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
126 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intergroup contact training + Regular course training

    In addition to the regular curriculum, the experimental group of nursing students were required to receive the intervention program developed by this study.

    Other: Intergroup contact training

  • Active comparator
    Regular course training only

    Nursing undergraduates in the control group received regular course teaching and practical activities, including geriatric nursing, daily courses and community activities.

    Other: Regular course training only

Interventions

  • OtherIntergroup contact training

    The intervention program uses direct contact and four types of indirect contact as the intervention strategy and general framework, and is divided into three main steps, assessing and reflecting on aging stereotypes, carrying out indirect and direct contact, and evaluating the effectiveness of the intervention. The time period is 12 weeks, with the interventionists comprising the researcher and nursing students. The forms of the intervention include holding mini-lectures, organizing participation in voluntary activities, and nostalgia interviews.

  • OtherRegular course training only

    The specific process is to sign in the classroom, review the knowledge of the previous class by asking questions, introduce the content of the new class, the teacher explains the knowledge points according to the teaching objectives and teaching content, and finally assigns the post-class homework of the course content. At the end of the experiment, the control group was given compensatory intervention.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The implicit effect value (D)

    The implicit effect value were measured by the Single-Category Implicit Association Test (SC- IAT), a time-limited word categorization task, using the E-Prime procedure. The SC-IAT program consists of four blocks: Blocks I and III are practice blocks, while Blocks II and IV are formal tests. The data analyzed were derived from Blocks II and IV. Blocks I and II feature incompatible tasks with positive words for the elderly on the left and negative words on the right. Blocks III and IV are compatible tasks, with positive words on the right and elderly concept words and negative words on the left. The implicit effect value (D) was calculated by subtracting the mean reaction time of the compatible task from that of the incompatible task, then dividing by the standard deviation of correct reaction times. A D value of 0 indicates a neutral implicit aging stereotype, while a value less than 0 suggests a negtive stereotype.

    Time frame: Baseline and Month 3

Secondary outcomes

  1. Geriatric Nursing Willingness Scale

    The Geriatric Nursing Willingness Scale was used to measure the intention to engage in geriatric nursing. The scale consists of 21 entries divided into four main sections: behavioral attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and behavioral intentions. It was scored on a 5-point Likert scale, with positive entries scoring 10, 8, 6, 4, and 2 in that order, and the reverse for negative entries. The Cronbach' α coefficient in this study was 0.787.

    Time frame: Baseline and Month 3

  2. Intergroup Anxiety Scale (IAS)

    The Intergroup Anxiety Scale was used to measure intergroup anxiety. The scale was developed by Stephan and consists of 10 entries on a 7-point Likert scale. Entries 5 to 7 are reverse scored, with lower scores indicating higher levels of intergroup anxiety. The scale is widely applied internationally, with a Cronbach' α coefficient of 0.808 in this study.

    Time frame: Baseline and Month 3

07

Study locations

1 site
  • School of Nursing, Hangzhou Normal University
    Hangzhou, Zhejiang 313000, China
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 15, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06615219
Lead sponsor
Huzhou University
Responsible party
Li Fang (Principal Investigator, Huzhou University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 26, 2024
Start date
May 1, 2022
Primary completion
Jul 31, 2022
Completion
Jul 31, 2022
Last update
Oct 15, 2024

Study contacts

Meijuan Cao
study chair · Huzhou University

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2024. 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