An interventional study of Multidimensional Intervention Group and Usual Clinical Internship Training Group in Ethical Decision-Making Competence in Nursing Student Interns, sponsored by Yangzhou University. Not yet recruiting. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-10.
Sponsored by Yangzhou University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of a 5-week multidimensional intervention in improving ethical decision-making competence among nursing student interns. The intervention is designed to address multiple factors influencing ethical decision-making during clinical training. The study will also examine whether the effects of the intervention are maintained at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention ends.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Researchers will compare nursing student interns who receive the 5-week multidimensional intervention with those who receive usual clinical internship training to evaluate the intervention's effectiveness.
Participants will:
Yangzhou University is the lead sponsor of 41 studies on the registry; 6 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.
Participants assigned to this group will receive a 5-week multidimensional intervention designed to improve ethical decision-making competence among nursing student interns during clinical learning. The intervention will address factors relevant to ethical decision-making through structured educational activities. Participants will complete outcome assessments at baseline, at the end of the intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention ends.
Other: Multidimensional Intervention Group · Other: Usual Clinical Internship Training Group
Participants assigned to this group will receive usual clinical internship training according to the hospital's standard training arrangements. They will not receive the study-specific 5-week multidimensional intervention during the intervention period. Participants will complete outcome assessments at baseline, at the end of the 5-week intervention period, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention period ends.
Other: Usual Clinical Internship Training Group
A 5-week multidimensional educational intervention to improve ethical decision-making competence among nursing student interns. Sessions will be delivered once weekly, lasting 1.5-2 hours each. The intervention includes five modules: (1) ethical issue recognition; (2) ethical emotion regulation; (3) ethical reasoning and decision-making; (4) ethical expression and action; and (5) clinical teaching rounds. The intervention aims to strengthen participants' ethical awareness, emotional regulation, decision-making, and ability to address ethical challenges during clinical learning.
Participants in the usual clinical internship training group will receive routine clinical learning and teaching according to the hospital's established training program. Regular activities include clinical skills training, observation and participation in nursing care under the supervision of clinical instructors, case discussions. When encountering ethical issues during clinical learning, participants will generally seek advice from their clinical instructors or supervising nurses. No additional study-specific intervention will be provided.
Ethical Decision-Making Competence Scale
The scale consists of 18 items across four dimensions and assesses nursing students' creativity, confidence, awareness, and neutrality when facing ethical decision-making dilemmas involving patients or their families. It is based on Rest's Four-Component Model of Ethical Decision-Making, comprising ethical judgment, ethical sensitivity, ethical motivation, and ethical action. Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The total score ranges from 0 to 72, with higher scores indicating a higher level of ethical decision-making competence.
Time frame: At baseline, immediately after the 5-week intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention.
Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale
This scale measures nurses' levels of imposter phenomenon and their attributions. It consists of 18 items across three dimensions: passive concealment (4 items), external attribution (6 items), and self-doubt (8 items). Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("completely inconsistent") to 5 ("completely consistent"). The total score ranges from 18 to 90, with higher scores indicating a more severe imposter phenomenon.
Time frame: At baseline, immediately after the 5-week intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention.
Rushton Moral Resilience Scale
The scale consists of 17 items across three dimensions: coping with nursing ethical dilemmas and relational integrity (10 items), personal integrity (2 items), and ethical efficacy in nursing (5 items). Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 4 ("strongly agree"). The total score ranges from 17 to 68, with higher scores indicating greater ethical resilience.
Time frame: At baseline, immediately after the 5-week intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention.
Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire for Nursing Students
This scale measures nursing students' moral sensitivity and consists of 11 items across three dimensions: moral strength (4 items), moral burden (5 items), and moral responsibility (2 items). Each item is rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 6 ("strongly agree"). The total score ranges from 11 to 66, with higher scores indicating greater moral sensitivity.
Time frame: At baseline, immediately after the 5-week intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention.
Professional Quality Of Life Scale
The scale consists of three dimensions: compassion satisfaction (CS), burnout (BO), and secondary traumatic stress (STS). CS represents a positive aspect, whereas BO and STS represent negative aspects. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 ("never") to 5 ("always"). The cutoff scores for CS, BO, and STS are 27, and \>17, respectively. Compassion fatigue severity is classified as mild when one dimension exceeds its cutoff, moderate when two dimensions exceed their cutoffs, and severe when all three dimensions exceed their cutoffs.
Time frame: At baseline, immediately after the 5-week intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-ups after the intervention.
No study locations are listed for this record.
Start is estimated for Nov 2026; primary completion for Mar 2027, 4 months later.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Nov 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.
Yangzhou University