An interventional study of Engagement-Based Academic Advising and Standard Reactive Academic Advising in Academic Advising, Engagement-Based Advising and Active-Empathic Listening, sponsored by Al-Zaytoonah University of Jordan. Completed at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-09.
Sponsored by Al-Zaytoonah University of Jordan · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research
This study examined the relationship between engagement-based academic advising and undergraduate nursing students' academic success, focusing on term-to-term retention, annual credit completion, and cumulative grade point average (GPA). It also investigated whether advisor active-empathic listening mediated these relationships and whether the associations differed according to first-generation status and scholarship eligibility. A prospective cluster-randomized mixed-methods study was conducted among 995 first-year undergraduate nursing students assigned to 30 academic advisors. Data were collected using student-reported and observer-rated listening measures, institutional academic records, and qualitative information about advising implementation. Students with high exposure to engagement-based advising had higher odds of term-to-term retention, completed more annual credits, and achieved higher cumulative GPAs than students with low exposure. Advisor active-empathic listening partially mediated the associations between advising exposure and all three academic outcomes, accounting for approximately 40%-46% of the total effects. The association between advising exposure and GPA was stronger among first-generation students, whereas the interaction with scholarship eligibility was not statistically significant. These findings highlight the potential importance of proactive advising, collaborative academic planning, and attentive, responsive communication in supporting undergraduate persistence and achievement. The results may inform the development and evaluation of student-support strategies in nursing education, although further research across diverse institutions is needed to confirm generalizability and strengthen causal interpretation.
This study investigates the role of engagement-based academic advising in supporting undergraduate nursing students' academic progression and persistence. It focuses on the relational aspects of advising, particularly active-empathic listening, and examines how the quality of advisor-student interactions may be associated with students' academic outcomes.
The study was conducted among first-year undergraduate nursing students at Menoufia University during the 2025-2026 academic year. A total of 995 students, nested within 30 academic advisors, participated in a prospective study using a cluster-randomized mixed-methods design. Academic advisors were assigned to either an engagement-based advising condition or a standard reactive advising condition. Engagement-based advising involved proactive outreach, developmental dialogue, collaborative academic goal-setting, documented action plans, and structured follow-up. The study distinguished between students' assigned advising conditions and their actual exposure to engagement-based advising.
Academic outcomes were assessed using institutional records, including term-to-term retention, annual credit completion, and cumulative grade point average. Advisor active-empathic listening was examined using student-reported perceptions measured with the Active-Empathic Listening Scale and observed listening behaviors assessed with the Active Listening Observation Scale. Qualitative information, including advisor field notes and de-identified advising-session transcripts, was also collected to document intervention implementation and provide context for the quantitative findings.
The analysis examined associations between advising exposure and academic outcomes while accounting for relevant student characteristics and the clustering of students within academic advisors. Mediation analyses explored whether active-empathic listening represented a potential relational pathway linking advising exposure with academic outcomes. Moderation analyses examined whether these associations differed according to first-generation status and scholarship eligibility.
The findings indicated that students with greater exposure to engagement-based advising had higher odds of term-to-term retention, greater annual credit completion, and higher cumulative GPA than students with lower exposure. Advisor active-empathic listening partially mediated the associations between advising exposure and all three academic outcomes. The mediation estimates suggested that listening accounted for approximately 40%-46% of the total effects. The association between advising exposure and cumulative GPA was significantly stronger among first-generation students, whereas the interaction involving scholarship eligibility was not statistically significant.
The study highlights the potential value of evaluating academic advising according to both the frequency of student contact and the quality of advisor-student interactions. Its findings may inform the development of academic advising practices that emphasize attentive listening, collaborative planning, proactive communication, and systematic follow-up. However, because the primary analyses considered students' realized advising exposure, the results should be interpreted as evidence of meaningful associations rather than definitive proof of causality. Further research across multiple institutions and academic disciplines is needed to assess the generalizability and sustainability of these findings.
Al-Zaytoonah University of Jordan is the lead sponsor of 31 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 the intervention arm received a structured engagement-based academic advising model throughout the 2025-2026 academic year. The intervention involved proactive advisor-initiated outreach before critical academic milestones and sustained individualized developmental interactions. Advisors collaboratively identified students' academic goals, assessed academic and nonacademic barriers, and developed individualized strategies to support academic progress. Active-empathic listening was integrated into advising sessions through attentive communication, recognition and understanding of students' concerns, reflective responses, paraphrasing, open-ended questioning, and responsive feedback. Each session included collaborative goal setting and a documented action plan specifying the responsibilities of both students and advisors.
Behavioral: Engagement-Based Academic Advising
Participants received standard academic advising throughout the 2025-2026 academic year. Students initiated contact with assigned advisors regarding academic difficulties, registration issues, or university requirements. Advisors provided guidance on course selection, academic performance, and available support services. Unlike the intervention group, students did not receive systematic proactive outreach, structured developmental dialogue, collaborative goal setting, documented action plans, or scheduled four-week follow-up. Routine university support services remained accessible. Academic outcomes, including retention, annual credit completion, and cumulative GPA, were obtained from institutional records.
Behavioral: Standard Reactive Academic Advising
A structured engagement-based academic advising intervention delivered throughout the 2025-2026 academic year to undergraduate nursing students. The intervention includes proactive advisor-initiated outreach before critical academic milestones, individualized developmental dialogue, and collaborative identification of academic goals and potential academic or nonacademic barriers. Advisors apply active-empathic listening skills, including attentive listening, recognizing students' concerns, reflective communication, paraphrasing, and open-ended questioning. Each advising session incorporates collaborative goal setting and development of a documented action plan specifying student and advisor responsibilities. Structured follow-up is conducted within four weeks to review progress, address challenges, and revise action plans when necessary. Intervention fidelity is monitored through structured checklists and advising system records.
Standard university academic advising provided throughout the 2025-2026 academic year. Students initiated contact with assigned academic advisors regarding academic difficulties, course registration, administrative concerns, and academic progression. Advisors provided routine educational guidance, clarified university requirements, assisted with course selection, and directed students to available academic support services. No structured proactive outreach, standardized developmental dialogue, collaborative action planning, or scheduled follow-up protocol was introduced.
Term-to-Term Undergraduate Student Retention Rate
The proportion of undergraduate nursing students who remained enrolled in the subsequent major academic term. Retention was determined using institutional enrollment records and compared between students receiving engagement-based academic advising and those receiving standard reactive academic advising.
Time frame: From baseline enrollment to the end of the 2025-2026 academic year (approximately 30 weeks).
Annual Credit Completion Ratio
The proportion of academic credits successfully earned relative to the total credits attempted during the academic year. It will be calculated as the number of earned credits divided by the number of attempted credits. The score ranges from 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating greater academic progress. Data will be extracted from official university records.
Time frame: At the end of the academic year (Week 30; 2025-2026 academic year).
Cumulative Grade Point Average (GPA)
Cumulative academic grade point average measured on a 4.0-point scale using official university academic records. Higher scores indicate better overall academic achievement.
Time frame: At the end of the academic year (Week 30; 2025-2026 academic year).
Plan to share: Undecided
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Sep 2025 to primary completion in Apr 2026, 7 months.
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 completed, as verified in Oct 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.
Al-Zaytoonah University of Jordan