NCT Number: NCT07461974
Cancer pain is a significant clinical problem that directly affects patients' quality of life and requires nurses to be equipped with adequate knowledge and skills to provide effective care. The current shift in knowledge and skill acquisition from traditional teaching methods toward e-learning-based approaches has increased the importance of comparing the effects of these educational methods on learning outcomes in cancer pain management education.
Within this context, the course content on cancer pain management will be developed using both traditional and e-learning methods based on the ADDIE instructional design model. The effects of these two methods on students' learning outcomes and institutional teaching costs will be evaluated. Thus, this study aims to contribute to identifying effective and cost-efficient teaching strategies in nursing education.
Trial opening soon.
Get Notified18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Nursing education prepares qualified nurses to meet the care needs of individuals, families, and communities using evidence-based practices. Curricula in line with Türkiye and European Union standards provide both theoretical and clinical education and use various models: traditional, integrated, and problem-based learning. Recently, the pandemic, natural disasters, and fast technological changes have driven interest in student-centered and digital teaching. E-learning that uses digital tools like simulation, virtual reality, augmented reality, and gamification boosts learning motivation and enriches education.
Traditional teaching, used worldwide, has key advantages for classroom management and discipline. Its teacher-centered structure ensures systematic transfer of fundamental knowledge. This method achieves learning goals for knowledge and comprehension and delivers broad information quickly. Some research finds e-learning benefits knowledge and skills, while other studies report no significant learning difference from traditional methods.
However, studies comparing the costs of traditional and e-learning methods remain limited. Although the use of technology in education is often emphasized as cost-effective, most existing studies have focused on simulation costs and have not provided comprehensive quantitative cost analyses to support this claim. This gap highlights the importance of conducting detailed cost analyses in order to objectively evaluate the true cost-effectiveness of educational practices. Furthermore, the use of instructional design models is recommended to develop effective, systematic, and standardized teaching processes in both traditional and digital learning environments.
Within the scope of this study, the course content on cancer pain management will be developed using both traditional and e-learning methods based on the ADDIE instructional design model. The effects of these two methods on students' learning outcomes and institutional teaching costs will be evaluated. In this way, the study aims to contribute to identifying effective and cost-efficient teaching strategies in nursing education.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
For the e-learning method, the cancer pain management course will be delivered through a web-based platform designed according to the ADDIE model, using artificial intelligence-supported avatar lectures and gamified case scenarios.
Other names: Educational intervention in cancer pain management training
For the traditional teaching method, the cancer pain management course will be delivered through classroom lectures and case scenarios designed according to the ADDIE model.
Other names: Educational intervention in cancer pain management training
Time frame: Twice, once at the end of the training (day 1) and again after 4 weeks.
The test, which will be developed by the researchers based on the literature, was prepared in two stages. In the first stage, multiple-choice questions were developed by the researchers based on the expected learning outcomes related to the cancer pain topic taught in the Internal Medicine Nursing course and the resources used in the course. In the second stage, an expert panel consisting of five faculty members from the field of Internal Medicine Nursing was formed to evaluate the content validity of the test. The experts assessed the content validity of the test using the Davis technique, and their suggestions for revision or modification were obtained. The expert evaluations were analyzed using the Content Validity Index, and the final version of the knowledge test was established based on the experts' feedback. The test consists of 20 questions, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 100. Higher scores indicate greater knowledge.
Time frame: Twice, once at the end of the training (day 1) and again after 4 weeks.
The learning outcomes related to cancer pain education identified by the researchers were used as the basis for developing a scenario lasting approximately 25-30 minutes and a corresponding skill evaluation checklist. The prepared scenario and checklist will be evaluated in terms of scope and content by a group of experts in the field. During the implementation phase, students will provide care to a patient with cancer pain described in the scenario. The students' practical skills during the scenario will be assessed using the skill evaluation checklist by one evaluator and one observer, who are nursing educators and are independent of the researchers. The maximum score that can be obtained from the application is 100, and the minimum score is 0. Higher scores indicate higher skill levels.
Time frame: once at the end of the training (day 1)
The scale was developed by Keller in 2006 to measure motivation toward instructional materials. In 2016, it was adapted into Turkish by Dinçer and Doğanay. The original version of the scale consists of 36 items in a five-point Likert format; however, during the Turkish adaptation process, three items were removed. The scale consists of four subdimensions: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. Items 3, 7, 12, 15, 19, 22, 26, 29, 31, and 34 are negatively worded and require reverse scoring. The minimum possible score on the scale is 36 and the maximum score is 180, with a midpoint of 108.00. The internal reliability coefficient of the scale was calculated as 0.93.
Time frame: at the end of the study
To determine the cost of education, a Cost Information Form was developed based on the literature and expert opinions, taking into account the institutional costs incurred for students' education. The expenditure items included in the form will be calculated in Turkish Lira.
Time frame: once at the end of the training (day 1)
Students will evaluate the instructor's performance by marking a point between 0 and 10 on a continuous line between two endpoints. Higher scores indicate better educator performance, while lower scores indicate poorer educator performance.
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Bilecik Seyh Edebali Universitesi
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07682558
Cancer Pain, Cancer Palliative Care
Basel, Switzerland
View Trial DetailsNCT07497451
Cancer Pain, Neurologic Manifestations
Amman, Jordan
View Trial DetailsNCT07489625
Cancer Pain, Neurologic Manifestations
Xining, China
View Trial DetailsNCT05265052
Cancer Pain, Neurologic Manifestations
View Trial Details