Cited by 13Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationStudent Stress and Coping

The implementation of artificial intelligence in nursing education and its psychological impact on nursing students: A cross-sectional study

Bahari, Ghareeb, Alenazi, Latifah, Alkathiri, Alwah Mohammed·2025·Nurse Education Today

Abstract

Background The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into education has the potential to transform learning experiences, particularly in nursing. Understanding students' perceptions of AI and its impact on psychological factors, such as self-efficacy and psychological distress, is crucial for effective implementation. Objective The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that influence nursing students' perceptions of AI, psychological distress, and self-efficacy. Design A cross-sectional study design was used. Participants and setting This study was conducted using a convenience sample of 108 nursing students from a public university in Saudi Arabia. Methods Three instruments were used: The Perceptions of AI, Kessler Psychological Distress, and Self-Efficacy scales. Data were analyzed using independent sample t-tests, one-way ANOVA, Pearson's correlation, and multiple linear regression. Results The study found that participants who used AI displayed significant differences in their self-efficacy. Additionally, notable associations were found between perceptions of AI, self-efficacy, and psychological distress. However, while the regression models were significant, the perceptions of AI did not meaningfully explain the variance in these outcomes (p > 0.05). Conclusions This study highlights the significance of addressing students' perceptions of AI to improve their educational experiences and mental well-being. Future research should explore the longitudinal impact of mental health interventions in technology-driven learning environments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nedt.2025.106816

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bahari, G., Alenazi, L., & Alkathiri, A. M.
Affiliations
King Saud University (SA)
Corresponding author
Bahari, Ghareeb
Venue
Nurse Education Today
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-10
Volume
153
Pages
106816
ISSN
0260-6917 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4411461312
Cited by
10
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 1
FWCI
10.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nurse Education Today (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • King Saud University
  • King Saud University Deanship of Scientific Research (ORF-2025-438)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, nursing students, perceptions of AI, self-efficacy, psychological distress, student mental health, nursing education, technology-enhanced learning
MeSH terms
Adult, Artificial Intelligence, Cross-Sectional Studies, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Female, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Saudi Arabia, Stress, Psychological, Students, Nursing, Self Efficacy, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review