An interventional study of Structured smartphone-based digital literacy training in Aging, Literacy-language Intervention and Literacy, sponsored by Akdeniz University. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 60 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-07-09.
Sponsored by Akdeniz University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
This study examined whether a structured, classroom-based smartphone training programme can improve digital literacy and confidence in using a smartphone among adults aged 60 years and older enrolled in a lifelong-learning programme. The study used a non-randomised, wait-list-controlled design with two existing class cohorts: one cohort received the training first (intervention group), and the other continued with its usual programme activities and served as a comparison (wait-list control group). Digital literacy and smartphone self-efficacy were measured before the training, immediately after the training, and again three months later. The aim was to determine whether older adults who took part in the training showed greater improvement than those who did not.
The training programme consisted of 12 sessions delivered over 6 weeks (two sessions per week, each lasting 90 to 105 minutes). Content was mapped to the DigComp 2.2 digital competence framework and covered practical smartphone skills for everyday life. Sessions used participants' own Android smartphones together with a projector for demonstration, a class messaging group for support, and between-session practice tasks. The intervention arm comprised the advanced-level cohort of the Akdeniz University 60+ Refresher (Tazelenme) University, and the wait-list control arm comprised the second-year cohort of the same programme.
Two instruments were used. Digital literacy was assessed with the Digital Literacy Scale (score range 12 to 60), the primary outcome. Smartphone self-efficacy was assessed with the Smartphone Self-Efficacy Scale (score range 20 to 100), a secondary outcome. Both were administered at baseline (T1), immediately after the intervention (T2), and at three-month follow-up (T3). Programme satisfaction was assessed with a short questionnaire after the intervention.
The primary analysis used a baseline-adjusted linear mixed model on the full analysis set, including a group-by-baseline interaction and adjustment for age, sex, education, and marital status. Robustness was examined through several pre-specified sensitivity analyses, including per-protocol analysis, difference-in-differences, propensity-score overlap weighting, multiple imputation, and a conservative worst-case (missing-not-at-random) analysis.
201 studies on the registry are indexed under Literacy; 69 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 140 is above the median of 124 across 170 interventional studies indexed under Literacy.
Browse Literacy studies →Akdeniz University is the lead sponsor of 297 studies on the registry; 62 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
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.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Advanced-level cohort receiving a structured smartphone training programme: 12 sessions over 6 weeks (two sessions per week, 90 to 105 minutes each), mapped to the DigComp 2.2 framework, using participants' own Android smartphones.
Behavioral: Structured smartphone-based digital literacy training
Second-year cohort continuing usual programme activities with the training deferred; served as the comparison group.
Instructor-led smartphone training delivered in 12 sessions over 6 weeks (twice weekly, 90 to 105 minutes), mapped to the DigComp 2.2 framework, using participants' own Android smartphones, a projector for demonstration, a class messaging group, and between-session practice tasks.
Change in Digital Literacy Scale (DLS) score
Digital literacy assessed with the Digital Literacy Scale. Scores range from a minimum of 12 to a maximum of 60. Higher scores indicate greater digital literacy (a better outcome).
Time frame: Baseline (T1), immediately post-intervention (approximately week 6, T2), and 3-month follow-up (T3)
Change in Smartphone Self-Efficacy Scale (SSES) score
Smartphone self-efficacy assessed with the Smartphone Self-Efficacy Scale. Scores range from a minimum of 20 to a maximum of 100. Higher scores indicate greater smartphone self-efficacy (a better outcome).
Time frame: Baseline (T1), immediately post-intervention (approximately week 6, T2), and 3-month follow-up (T3)
Programme satisfaction
Participant satisfaction with the training programme, assessed with a 10-item satisfaction questionnaire. Scores range from a minimum of 10 to a maximum of 50. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction (a better outcome).
Time frame: Immediately post-intervention (approximately week 6, T2)
Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual participant data underlying the reported results are available from the corresponding author (B.K.) on reasonable request, subject to ethics and participant-confidentiality restrictions. The analysis code is likewise available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Supporting information: Analytic code
Time frame: Available beginning after publication of the main results, with no fixed end date.
Access criteria: Requests are reviewed by the corresponding author (B.K.). De-identified data and analytic code will be shared with researchers who submit a methodologically sound proposal and sign a data-access and confidentiality agreement, subject to applicable ethics approvals and participant-confidentiality restrictions.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Apr 2025 to primary completion in Aug 2025, 4 months.
Of 115 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Literacy, half reached primary completion within 11 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 4 and three quarters within 20. This study's 4 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 117 studies reached it within 11 months; a quarter within 4 and three quarters within 19.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.