Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40823249›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025

Integrative review of artificial intelligence applications in nursing: education, clinical practice, workload management, and professional perceptions.

Rabie Adel El Arab, Omayma Abdulaziz Al Moosa, Mette Sagbakken, Ahmed Ghannam, Fuad H Abuadas, Joel Somerville, Abbas Al Mutair

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. AI-powered tools in family medicine: Bridging technology and practice.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Rabie Adel El ArabAlmoosa College of Health Sciences, Alhasa, Saudi Arabia.
Omayma Abdulaziz Al MoosaAlmoosa College of Health Sciences, Alhasa, Saudi Arabia.
Mette SagbakkenDepartment of Nursing and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
Ahmed GhannamDepartment of Computer Science, Princess Sumaya University for Technology, Amman, Jordan.
Fuad H AbuadasDepartment of Community Health Nursing, College of Nursing, Jouf University, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia.
Joel SomervilleInverness College, University of the Highlands and Island, Inverness, United Kingdom.
Abbas Al MutairAlmoosa College of Health Sciences, Alhasa, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the nursing profession, presenting significant opportunities and challenges. Despite its promising potential in enhancing nursing education, clinical practice, and operational efficiency, critical barriers related to ethics, workforce adaptation, and humanistic care persist. Aim: This integrative review systematically evaluates the integration of AI in nursing practice, with a specific focus on nursing education, clinical care, workload management, and professional perceptions. Methods: Guided by PRISMA 2020 and the SPIDER framework, a thematic synthesis was conducted. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), and the risk of bias evaluated through ROBINS-I. Results: This review encompassed 25 studies, from which six overarching themes emerged. Education and training: AI-powered simulations and content-creation platforms enriched nursing curricula by presenting realistic clinical scenarios, which consistently yielded deeper student engagement, enhanced case-management performance, and higher satisfaction scores. Learners also reported an increased cognitive load and heightened stress levels when navigating these more complex, AI-driven activities. Clinical decision support and monitoring: AI-enabled alert algorithms and wearable sensors enabled nurses to detect subtle signs of patient deterioration and fever significantly earlier than conventional methods, supporting timelier clinical interventions. Qualitative feedback from critical-care staff underscores that these automated insights must be balanced with professional judgment to avoid overreliance. Rehabilitation and postoperative care: In neurosurgical, gynecological, and orthopaedic settings, AI-guided imaging tools and personalized follow-up pathways were linked to smoother recovery trajectories, streamlined follow-up processes and richer patient feedback, and exceptionally high patient satisfaction. Nurses noted that these technologies enhanced the precision of assessments without wholly replacing the need for human touch. Workload and workflow management: AI systems that automated routine follow-up tasks and generated predictive workload models freed nurses from repetitive, non-clinical duties and offered data-driven insights to inform staffing decisions. These efficiencies allowed nursing teams to devote more time to direct patient care and were associated with reductions in burnout and improved workplace morale. Nursing perceptions: Across practice settings, nursing students and practicing nurses broadly welcomed AI's ability to streamline workflows and support decision-making, recognizing its potential to elevate patient care and professional practice. Ethical implications: Simultaneously, nurses voiced significant ethical concerns-chiefly around safeguarding patient data privacy, mitigating algorithmic bias, and preserving the compassionate, human-centered essence of nursing in an increasingly automated environment. Framework and recommendations: The Nursing AI Integration Roadmap (NAIIR) was developed, emphasizing transformational education, advanced clinical integration, ethical governance, robust organizational infrastructure, participatory design, and rigorous economic evaluation. This framework offers a structured, ethically informed, and user-centric approach, advocating for AI as complementary to human expertise. Conclusion: Successfully integrating AI into nursing requires comprehensive strategic planning that addresses educational, clinical, ethical, organizational, participatory, and economic dimensions, reinforcing the core humanistic values of nursing. Of the 25 included studies, 21 were judged at moderate risk of bias; despite this limitation, evidence suggests improvements in critical thinking, learner engagement, and clinical satisfaction across diverse educational and practice settings.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEducation, NursingWorkloadHumansartificial intelligenceclinical decision supportnursing educationnursing practicepatient monitoringworkload management

Identifiers

PMID40823249
PMCPMC12354398

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.