CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 144Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in EducationSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Artificial intelligence in nursing education: A scoping review

Lifshits, Igal, Rosenberg, Dennis·2024·Nurse Education in Practice
DOI 10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104148
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aim To explore recent empirical studies on implementation of artificial intelligence in nursing education in hospital settings through the prism of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) model.Background In the last decade, artificial intelligence has markedly influenced healthcare and nursing domains, particularly in improving care and educational processes for nursing staff. Despite its ongoing integration in nursing education, an understanding of its impact remained limited.Design Scoping review.Methods A systematic search using PubMed and ScienceDirect databases, following PRISMA guidelines, identified relevant studies. The main inclusion criteria were empirical studies from 2018 onwards and a focus on nursing students/registered nurses in hospital settings. The exclusion criteria were non-empirical documentation such as abstracts, editorials and opinion-related articles, as well as studies in surgical, pediatric, gynecological and mental health nursing.Results In total, 15 articles were selected from a pool of 6517 documents. The aspects mentioned in the employed literature highlighted the positive impact of artificial intelligence on educational experiences, knowledge acquisition and mental safety. Challenges of the artificial intelligence implementation in the nursing education field, such as technical issues, language barriers and limited realistic experience were also identified.Conclusions The findings of the review suggest that artificial intelligence provides significant benefits for nursing education. However, continuous evaluation managing weaknesses and maximizing the educational potential of artificial intelligence in the nursing field is crucial.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104148

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Peters, 2020, Chapter 11: Scoping reviews. JBI Manual for Evidence, Synthesis, 169, 467

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–144 of 144

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lifshits, I., & Rosenberg, D.
Affiliations
Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
ORCID
Rosenberg, Dennis
Venue
Nurse Education in Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-10
Volume
80
Pages
104148
ISSN
1471-5953 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104148
OpenAlex
W4403244162
Cited by
121
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 1
FWCI
2.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Nurse Education in Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Keywords
artificial intelligence, nursing education, hospital-based nursing education, SWOT analysis, implementation barriers, nursing students, registered nurses, knowledge acquisition, technical challenges, language barriers, simulation-based training
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Clinical Competence, Education, Nursing, Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate, Humans, Students, Nursing

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