ClinicalTrials.gg
Enrolling by invitationNCT07095335Updated Mar 20, 2026

Evaluating Simulation Experiences to Help Navigate Racism and Hidden Bias

An interventional study of education intervention A-CHARM in Implicit Bias, sponsored by Queen's University. Enrolling by invitation at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-20.

Primary conditionRacismRegistry: Bias, ImplicitReclassifiedWhy we changed it
Registry
Bias, Implicit — the first condition term the registry derived for this study.
ClinicalTrials.gg
Racism
Why
  1. Bias, Implicit is a broad heading, used only when no more specific condition is named.
  2. The study's title name Racism.
Confidence
High: the new condition is named in the study's own title. Of 46 hand-checked studies reclassified this way, 72% were exactly right and 89% in the right disease family; the registry's first term was right for 4% (measured 2026-10-21). How we classify →
Wrong?
Tell us the study's main condition →

Sponsored by Queen's University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 1 year 8 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Aug 2023, registered May 2025).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
450
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study utilizes a quasi-experimental design to examine the acceptability, usability and impact of the A-CHARM resources including the pre-learning, the SEs and the debrief. Consenting participants will be asked to complete a demographic questionnaire and pre-simulation assessment of cultural humility using the Cultural Humility Scale, and cultural awareness using the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire. Participants will complete an education intervention that provides definitions of race, racism, and discrimination and provides an overview of the Six-Step Approach, ERASE framework and Microaggression Triangle model. Following the education intervention, they will complete a SE and a post-simulation questionnaire that reassess cultural humility, cultural awareness and the usability and acceptability of the SE.

Read the detailed description

Background and Literature Review:

Anti-Black and anti-Asian racism has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic, with the number of hate crimes committed due to race or ethnicity increasing by 80% in Canada in 2020. This includes police-reported hate crimes targeting the Black, East or Southeast Asian, Indigenous, and South Asian peoples. Healthcare providers, including nurses who are persons of color, are not exempt from experiencing racism and hidden biases. These experiences often occur in the clinical setting, are unreported or underreported, and have a negative impact on nurses. A study conducted with nurses (n= 788) in New Jersey, United States, examined the direct, indirect, and interactive effects of individual (race), interpersonal (workplace racial microaggressions), and institutional (racial climate) factors on hospital-based nurses' emotional well- being. Compared to White nurses, non-white nurses reported higher emotional distress, more negative racial climates, and more microaggressions due to race.

Nursing students who experience racism or inappropriate comments in the clinical setting often do not possess appropriate strategies regarding how to respond. In addition, faculty, colleagues or other bystanders may not know how to respond. Traditionally, the method of coping has been avoidance or silence.

However, by not addressing racism it can indicate that inappropriate behaviours are acceptable. Providing nursing students with opportunities to critically examine how they may navigate inappropriate comments or racism, if they experience or witness it, is one strategy that can be utilized. Simulation education provides an opportunity for nursing students to engage in scenarios that based on real life experiences in a safe environment. In this proposed study we utilize the term simulation experiences (SEs) to highlight the lived experiences that the simulations are based on.

Due to the lack of available resources an education session and five virtual simulation experiences (SEs) were developed through the A-CHARM (Addressing Culturally based Hidden bias and RacisM) nursing project.

A search of the literature for frameworks or steps that healthcare professionals, including nursing students, can use to address inappropriate comments or racism in the clinical setting was also conducted. Three models were found and include the: 1) Six-Step Approach, 2) ERASE framework 3) Microaggression Triangle model.

Nursing students and clinical faculty require the opportunity to practice using these frameworks in a safe environment prior to utilizing them in real world situations. Simulation experiences can be used to create a safe environment for nursing students to critically assess how they could us these frameworks to address hidden-bias and racism prior to experiencing or witnessing them. These SEs can be a great resource; however, they need to be evaluated.

Research question and objectives: The research question for this study is: In nursing students and clinical nursing faculty/instructors, what is the effectiveness of an education session and virtual simulation experiences (SE's) on cultural awareness and the ability to utilize strategies to navigate racism and inappropriate comments in the clinical setting.

The specific objectives are:

  1. To describe the acceptability, and usability of the virtual simulation experiences (SEs) that focus on how to professionally address racism and inappropriate comments.
  2. To examine the effect of the education intervention and the SEs on cultural humility and cultural awareness.

Method:

This cohort study utilizes a quasi-experimental design (quantitative and qualitative) to examine the acceptability, usability and impact of the A-CHARM resources including the pre-learning, the SEs and the debrief. Consenting participants will be asked to complete a demographic questionnaire and pre-simulation assessment of cultural humility using the Cultural Humility Scale, and cultural awareness using the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire.

Intervention: Participants will complete an education session that provides definitions of race, racism, and discrimination and provides an overview of the Six-Step Approach, ERASE framework and Microaggression Triangle model. Following the education session, they will complete a SE and a post-simulation questionnaire that reassess cultural humility, cultural awareness and the usability and acceptability of the SE.

Sample: The target population for this study includes undergraduate and graduate nursing students and clinical faculty at Queen's University. A convenience sample of a minimum of 100 nursing students and 20 clinical faculty/clinical instructors will be recruited to participate in this study. Clinical faculty/instructors will be introduced to the study and invited to participate in person during their yearly faculty orientation. Nursing students will be invited to participate via email and in person during their classes.

Setting: The setting will include a University, School of Nursing, in Southern, Ontario, Canada.

Quantitative data will be collected using a web-based survey through Qualtrics©. All participants will assign themselves an ID number (see Appendix for how the ID number will be created).

Participants will be asked to enter this ID number at the beginning of the pre-simulation and post- simulation questionnaires. After providing consent to participate in the study, participants will immediately complete the demographic information and the pre-simulation questionnaire. Once this information has been obtained, they will complete the education session and they will receive an electronic link to the simulation experience (SE) and the post-simulation questionnaire.

Outcome measures: To evaluate usability, engagement, and impact as perceived by participants the ClassRoom Instructional Support Perceptions (CRISP-VS) will be used. The CRISP-VS is 23 item, valid and reliable outcome measure previously used in studies with nursing students.

Reliability testing for the CRISP-VS reports a Cronbach's α of 0.79 for the usability subscale, 0.89 for the engagement subscale, and 0.82 for the impact subscale.

To evaluate cultural humility the Foronda's Cultural Humility Scale will be used. This outcome measure includes 19 questions and was validated and tested with 322 undergraduate nursing and health sciences students and yielded a Cronbach's α = 0.85.

The Foronda Cultural Humility Scale has three subscales including 1) context for difference in perspective; 2) self-attributes; and 3) outcomes of cultural humility. To evaluate cultural awareness the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire will be used. This questionnaire is designed to measure beliefs and behaviours regarding cultural diversity and inclusion. It is scored by summing the numbers chosen on the questionnaire (1 = never, 2 = almost, 3 = sometimes, 4 = almost always, 5 = always). A high score indicates the individual/participant has a good awareness of their biases and how their behaviours may impact others, the individual relates to others in ways that value diversity. The validity and reliability for the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire was tested with public school educators and it has a Cronbach's α = 0.9.

Data Analysis: Data will be analyzed using SPSS (IBM, V 29.0.1.1, 2021). Demographic data and the CRISP-VS will be analyzed using descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations and frequencies. To examine if there is a significant difference between pre-simulation and post-simulation cultural humility and cultural awareness scores, paired t-tests will be completed if the data is normally distributed. If the data is not normally distributed a Wilcoxon nonparametric test will be completed. A p- value of 0.05 or less will be considered significant. Reliability testing will also be conducted on the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire by calculating the Cronbach's α as this outcome measure has not been utilized with the Canadian nursing and nursing student population.

02

Conditions studied

  • Implicit Bias

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Implicit bias
  • racism
  • nurisng
  • clinical settings
  • nursing students
  • simulation experiences
  • education intervention
03

In context

Racism Reclassified

47 studies on the registry are indexed under Racism; 8 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 450 is above the median of 106 across 34 interventional studies indexed under Racism.

Browse Racism studies →

Lead sponsor

Queen's University is the lead sponsor of 207 studies on the registry; 16 are open to participants now.

Compared within Racism, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Bias, Implicit. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • undergraduate and graduate nursing students at a University in Southern Ontario
  • clinical faculty at a University in Southern Ontario
  • speak, read and understand English.
  • able to navigate a virtual simulation experience using an electronic device.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • students not enrolled in the nursing program
  • faculty not teaching in the nursing program
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
450 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intervention

    A-CHARM education and virtual simulation

    Other: education intervention A-CHARM

Interventions

  • Othereducation intervention A-CHARM

    Didactic education plus virtual simulation regarding discrimination in the hospital setting

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Cultural Humility

    To evaluate cultural humility the Foronda's Cultural Humility Scale will be used. This outcome measure includes 19 questions and was validated and tested with 322 undergraduate nursing and health sciences students and yielded a Cronbach's α = 0.85 (Foronda, Porter \& Phitwong, 2021). The Foronda Cultural Humility Scale has three subscales including 1) context for difference in perspective; 2) self-attributes; and 3) outcomes of cultural humility.

    Time frame: Day 1

Secondary outcomes

  1. Cultural Awareness

    . To evaluate cultural awareness the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire will be used (Bennett, 1986, Van Hook, 2000). This questionnaire is designed to measure beliefs and behaviours regarding cultural diversity and inclusion. It is scored by summing the numbers chosen on the questionnaire (1 = never, 2 = almost, 3 = sometimes, 4 = almost always, 5 = always). A high score indicates the individual/participant has a good awareness of their biases and how their behaviours may impact others, the individual relates to others in ways that value diversity (Illinois Leadership Project, 2016). The validity and reliability for the Cultural Diversity Awareness Questionnaire was tested with public school educators and it has a Cronbach's α = 0.9 (Henry, 1995).

    Time frame: Day 1

  2. usability, engagement, and impact

    To evaluate usability, engagement, and impact as perceived by participants the ClassRoom Instructional Support Perceptions (CRISP-VS) will be used. (see Appendix) The CRISP-VS is 23 item, valid and reliable outcome measure previously used in studies with nursing students. Reliability testing for the CRISP-VS reports a Cronbach's α of 0.79 for the usability subscale, 0.89 for the engagement subscale, and 0.82 for the impact subscale (Sheng, et al., 2019).

    Time frame: Day 1

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Li JS, Patterson M, Gumapac NP, Sau C, Mohamed S, Yusef HA, Sawhney M. Simulation Experiences Focusing on Addressing Culturally Based Hidden Bias and RacisM (A-CHARM). J Nurs Educ. 2025 Jul;64(7):449-453. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20240612-04. Epub 2024 Sep 20. PubMed 39292736 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Aug 2023 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Dec 2026, 40 months after the start.

Of 29 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Racism, half reached primary completion within 32 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 14 and three quarters within 41. This study's planned 40 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 29 studies reached it within 32 months; a quarter within 14 and three quarters within 41.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
May 18, 2025
First posted
Jul 31, 2025
StartActual
Aug 22, 2023
Primary completionEst.
Dec 2026
CompletionEst.
Dec 2026
Last update
Mar 20, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 20, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07095335
Lead sponsor
Queen's University
Responsible party
Monakshi Sawhney (Professor, Queen's University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jul 31, 2025
Start date
Aug 22, 2023
Primary completion
Dec 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 20, 2026

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.

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