Skip to content

Health Surveillance at Constructor University Bremen (CUB)

Health Surveillance by Constructor University Bremen (CUB) to Assess Germany-wide Students' Health and Wellbeing - Explanatory Sequential Mixed-Methods Approach

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06899308
Acronym
CUB-HS2025
Enrollment
373
Registered
2025-03-27
Start date
2025-03-17
Completion date
2027-12-31
Last updated
2026-09-14

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anxiety, Anxiety Depression (Mild or Not Persistent), Emotional Stress, Health Behavior, Life Stress, Observational Study, Psychological Stress, Social Isolation or Loneliness, Stress, Emotional, Stress, Psychological, Stress (Psychology), Substance Abuse, Substance Addiction, Substance Dependence, Substance Use

Keywords

Healthy students, Health literacy, Disability, Age, Gender, Study characteristics, PHQ-4, Self-efficacy, Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), Subjective health status, Student satisfaction, UCLA-LS, HEI-Stress, Mixed Method

Brief summary

The aim of Health Surveillance is to analyze and describe the state of health of students at Constructor University, key influencing factors and individual resources by using mixed-method design.

Detailed description

The aim of Health Surveillance plus the additional research by means of qualitative interviews is to analyze and describe the state of stress and health of students at Constructor University (CU) by using a mixed-methods approach, as well as explore the association and mechanism between stress and health of students at CU, key influencing factors and individual resources. In areas where there is a need for action, the Health Surveillance plus this project the additional qualitative interviews can provide detailed insights and/or in-depth analyses. The Health Surveillance thus provides information on health-related topics and delivers scientifically sound information as a basis for health-promoting discussions in the subsequent follow-up process at various levels (e.g. faculties and departments). In addition, the Health Surveillance plus the additional interviews at CU contributes to comparability with surveys at other German universities through the use of validated and standardized measuring instruments and in-depth qualitative interviews with qualitative content analysis, as well as to add new constructs i.e. artificial intelligence and digital technology use as well as demo-cratic competences, as this turned out to be new and important factors. Main hypotheses are 1. The Health Surveillance gives insights into state of stress and health of students at CU, key influencing factors and individual resources by using a mixed-methods approach. 2. With the Health Surveillance the health-promotion at CU by using a mixed-methods approach, as well as explore the association and mechanism between stress and health of students at CU, can be guided and promotion of mental health (including the reduction of loneliness and discrimination) can be strengthened. 3. The health of students, their perceived stress, loneliness and discrimination/minorization (disadvantage) as well as substance use interrelates with participation in health promoting activities? 4. Recommendations can be derived for qualification and skills training of multipliers for health-promoting behavior (e.g., J-peers)?

Interventions

OTHERquestionnaire

Questionnaires and interviews were primarily used as assessment and introspection tools to collect data on study participants' experiences, perceptions, and behaviors. Their purpose was to facilitate measurement and reflection rather than to deliver an intervention. However, it is acknowledged that participation in questionnaires and interviews may have had unintended interventional effects. Specifically, the process of answering questions and reflecting on personal experiences can increase participants' self-awareness, prompt critical reflection, and potentially influence subsequent attitudes or behaviors.

Sponsors

Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Lead SponsorOTHER
Hamburg University of Applied Sciences/Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg (HAW Hamburg)
CollaboratorUNKNOWN

Study design

Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* English language skills * Reading and writing skills * Internet access * Student status * Consent to participate in the study

Exclusion criteria

* Illiteracy * Massively limited cognitive abilities ( i.e. linguistic components of the digital offerings must be able to be used, and questionnaires completed, or interviews participated in) and severe psychiatric disorders (e.g., severe depression)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Loneliness2025 and 2026 (no matching)University of California Los Angelese Loneliness Scale (UCLA-LS) - 3 Items (Schobin, Arriagada \& Gibson-Kunze, 2024), Range 1 (never/nie) - 5 (very often/sehr oft), higher scores mean a worse outcome Loneliness in private and study context - 9 Items (Techniker Krankenkasse, 2024), Range 1 (often) - 4 (never), higher scores mean better outcomes
Health literacy2025 and 2026 (no matching)Health literacy - 10 Items (Lenartz, Söllner \& Rudinger, 2014), Range 1 (does not apply/trifft überhaupt nicht zu) - 4 (does fully apply/trifft genau zu), higher scores mean a better outcome

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Depression and anxiety2025 and 2026 (no matching)Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) - 4 Items (Kroenke, Spitzer, Williams \& Löwe, 2009), Range 0 (not at all/überhaupt nicht) - 3 (nearly every day/beinahe jeden Tag), higher scores mean worse outcome
Subjective health status2025 and 2026 (no matching)Subjective health status- 1 Item (WHO, 1996); Range 1 (very good/sehr gut) - 5 (very poor/schlecht), higher score means worse outcome
Student satisfaction2025 and 2026 (no matching)Student satisfaction - 1 Item (Westermann, Heise, Spies \& Trautwein, 1996), Range 0 (not at all satisfied/gar nicht zufrieden) - 100 (completely satisfied/vollkommen zufrieden), higher scores mean better outcome
HEI-Stress2025 and 2026 (no matching)Higher Education Institution Stress (HEI-Stress) - 3 Items (Schmidt, Sieverding, Scheiter \& Obergfell, 2013), Range 0 (not at all stressed/gar nicht gestresst) - 100 (very stressed/sehr gestresst), higher scores mean worse outcome

Countries

Germany

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORSonia Lippke, PhD

Constructor University Bremen gGmbH & Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, Germany

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Sep 15, 2026