Menu
Not yet recruiting NCT07435558

Homogeneous vs. Heterogeneous Learning Style Grouping in Problem-Based Learning Among Nurses

No phase Interventional Problem-based Learning in Nursing Education Nurses Randomized Clinical Trial

For patients and families

In plain language

An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.

What is being studied
The protocol lists: Homogeneous FSLSM-Based PBL Grouping, Heterogeneous FSLSM-Based PBL Grouping.
Who it may be relevant to
Registry conditions: Problem-based Learning in Nursing Education, Nurses, Randomized Clinical Trial. Basic parameters: No limits · All.
What needs checking
Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
Where it takes place
Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.
Next step
Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Official title

Effect of Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Grouping Based on the Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model on Problem-Based Learning Outcomes Among Nurses: A Parallel Randomized Clinical Trial

Overview

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a learner-centered educational approach that helps nurses improve clinical skills through group discussion, case analysis, and collaborative problem-solving. However, the way participants are assigned to learning groups may influence how effectively they learn. Differences in learning styles among group members can affect participation, confidence, interaction quality, and knowledge retention. The Felder-Silverman Learning Style Model (FSLSM) is a widely used framework that categorizes learners based on how they perceive, process, and understand information (e.g., active vs. reflective, visual vs. verbal). Organizing PBL groups according to similarities or differences in these learning styles may lead to different educational outcomes. This study is a parallel, two-arm randomized controlled clinical trial designed to compare the effects of homogeneous grouping (participants with similar learning styles placed in the same group) versus heterogeneous grouping (participants with diverse learning styles placed in the same group) on PBL outcomes among hospital nurses. Registered nurses employed in teaching hospitals affiliated with Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences are randomly assigned to one of the two grouping strategies. All participants receive the same PBL curriculum focused on patient safety and medication safety. The only difference between groups is the method used to form discussion teams. The primary outcome is medication safety competence, measured using a validated questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include clinical reasoning competence and nursing care quality. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and eight weeks later to evaluate both immediate effects and short-term retention. The findings of this study are expected to clarify whether grouping nurses based on similar or diverse learning styles leads to better improvement and retention of critical clinical competencies. Results may help educators design more effective PBL programs in nursing education and clinical training settings.

Interventions

  • Behavioral Homogeneous FSLSM-Based PBL Grouping
    An 8-session problem-based learning workshop delivered over six weeks focusing on patient safety culture, medication safety, root cause analysis, human factors, team communication, error disclosure, and risk management. Groups are formed to ensure similarity in learning style profiles according to Index of Learning Styles (ILS) scores. Sessions include case discussions, role-play, team-based tasks, brief simulations, and group presentations. Facilitators follow standardized guides.
  • Behavioral Heterogeneous FSLSM-Based PBL Grouping
    An 8-session problem-based learning workshop delivered over six weeks focusing on patient safety and related competencies. Group composition is determined using an Artificial Bee Colony optimization algorithm to maximize diversity of learning style profiles while maintaining balance across groups. Educational materials, facilitators, and learning activities are identical to the homogeneous arm.

Primary outcome measures

  • Medication Safety Competence [Time frame: Baseline (T0), Immediately Post-Intervention (within 1 week after final session, T1), and 8 Weeks Post-Intervention (T2)]
Secondary outcome measures (2)
  • Clinical Reasoning Competence [Time frame: Baseline (T0), Immediately Post-Intervention (T1), and 8 Weeks Post-Intervention (T2)]
  • Nursing Care Quality [Time frame: Baseline (T0), Immediately Post-Intervention (T1), and 8 Weeks Post-Intervention (T2)]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • written informed consent;
  • at least one year of clinical nursing experience;
  • availability to attend all scheduled workshop sessions (no planned extended leave during the intervention period);
  • completion of the Index of Learning Styles (ILS) questionnaire and availability of valid ILS scores for group allocation

Exclusion criteria

  • attendance in a similar PBL or patient-safety educational program within the previous 6-12 months;
  • significant uncorrectable hearing or vision impairment or severe cognitive/psychiatric condition that precluded participation;
  • concurrent participation in another interventional study likely to affect study outcomes;
  • repeated non-attendance (>2 missed sessions) or voluntary withdrawal after randomization.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: Yes

Study design

Allocation
Randomized
Model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single blind
Primary purpose
Other

Study locations

Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07435558 · IR.SBMU.PHARMACY.REC.1404.253

Primary sources (government registries)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗