Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Comparison of the effects of role-playing, small group discussion, and traditional teaching methods on nursing students' self-efficacy.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimSelf-efficacy is a key component in developing professional readiness among nursing students. It plays a crucial role in enhancing clinical performance, decision-making quality, and self-confidence. Therefore, identifying and applying effective educational methods to improve this capability is one of the major challenges in nursing education systems. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of three teaching approaches—role-playing, small group discussion, and traditional instruction—on the self-efficacy of nursing students.
methodsThis Quasi-experimental study with three groups was conducted on 90 nursing students at Zahedan University of Medical sciences, Iran. Participants were randomly assigned to groups by drawing a card: red card (role-playing), yellow card (group discussion), and green card (traditional teaching). In the traditional teaching group, the educational content was delivered through lecture and PowerPoint presentation. In the group discussion method, students were divided into subgroups of six, and each subgroup was provided with a clinical scenario related to the topic. With the guidance of a facilitator, the subgroups engaged in discussion and exchange of ideas about the scenario. In the role-playing method, students were divided into groups of four, and each member assumed one of the roles: nurse, parent, child, or observer. Each group received a structured clinical scenario related to the subject, and the students enacted the assigned roles and performed the scenarios. Data were collected using the Clinical Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, completed by all students before and three months after the intervention.
resultsThe present study demonstrated the clear superiority of active learning methods, particularly role-playing, over traditional teaching in enhancing nursing students’ self-efficacy. Role-playing, by providing a safe environment for practice, led to a 55.7% improvement in self-efficacy (p < 0.001, d = 1.55) and enhanced students’ professional confidence. Group discussion was also effective, resulting in a 50.9% improvement (p = 0.02), whereas traditional teaching yielded only a negligible 0.8% increase (p = 0.78).
conclusionThe findings suggest that using active and interactive teaching methods—especially role-playing—can effectively enhance nursing students’ self-efficacy. These results can be utilized in designing student-centered and participatory educational programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.