Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39015390›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2024

Knowledge and attitudes toward artificial intelligence in nursing among various categories of professionals in China: a cross-sectional study.

Xiaoyan Wang, Fangqin Fei, Jiawen Wei, Mingxue Huang, Fengling Xiang, Jing Tu, Yaping Wang, Jinhua Gan

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Xiaoyan Wang *School of Nursing, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan Province, China.
Fangqin Fei *Department of Nursing, First People's Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou University, Huzhou, Zhejiang Province, China.
Jiawen WeiSchool of Nursing, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan Province, China.
Mingxue HuangSchool of Nursing, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan Province, China.
Fengling XiangSchool of Nursing, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan Province, China.
Jing TuSchool of Nursing, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan Province, China.
Yaping WangDepartment of Nursing, Shenzhen Eye Institute, Shenzhen Eye Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China.
Jinhua GanDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Affiliated Hospital, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, Sichuan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare is an important public health issue. However, few studies have investigated the perceptions and attitudes of healthcare professionals toward its applications in nursing. This study aimed to explore the knowledge, attitudes, and concerns of healthcare professionals, AI-related professionals, and others in China toward AI in nursing. Methods: We conducted an online cross-sectional study on nursing students, nurses, other healthcare professionals, AI-related professionals, and others in China between March and April 2024. They were invited to complete a questionnaire containing 21 questions with four sections. The survey followed the principle of voluntary participation and was conducted anonymously. The participants could withdraw from the survey at any time during the study. Results: This study obtained 1,243 valid questionnaires. The participants came from 25 provinces and municipalities in seven regions of China. Regarding knowledge of AI in nursing, 57% of the participants knew only a little about AI, 4.7% did not know anything about AI, 64.7% knew only a little about AI in nursing, and 13.4% did not know anything about AI in nursing. For attitudes toward AI in nursing, participants were positive about AI in nursing, with more than 50% agreeing and strongly agreeing with each question on attitudes toward AI in nursing. Differences in the numbers of participants with various categories of professionals regarding knowledge and attitudes toward AI in nursing were statistically significant ( Conclusion: Nursing students and healthcare professionals lacked knowledge about AI or its application in nursing, but they had a positive attitude toward AI. It is necessary to strengthen medical ethics toward AI in nursing. The study's findings could help develop new strategies benefiting healthcare.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceAttitude of Health PersonnelHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultartificial intelligenceattitudeconcernethicknowledgenursing

Identifiers

PMID39015390
PMCPMC11250283

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.