Challenges in Implementing Artificial Intelligence for Nursing Education: A Systematic Review
Open accessAbstract
Context: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in health sciences education offers numerous benefits; however, a lack of awareness regarding the limitations of these tools may lead to financial and human losses. Objectives: Given that nurses constitute the largest segment of the healthcare team and their education is of paramount importance, this study explores the challenges associated with the use of AI in nursing education. Data Sources: A systematic review was conducted in 2025, utilizing databases such as ERIC, CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to search for relevant studies. The search employed appropriate keywords, with limitations set to articles published within the last five years and in English. Study Selection: After identifying relevant articles, their quality was assessed using suitable tools. This step ensured that only high-quality studies were included in the review, providing a reliable basis for analysis. Data Extraction: Various data were extracted, categorized, and analyzed. This comprehensive approach allowed for a thorough examination of the challenges associated with the use of AI in nursing education. Results: Out of 307 identified studies, 18 articles were reviewed. Based on the findings of this study, the challenges associated with the use of AI in nursing education were categorized into six main groups: Educational, technological, ethical, trust-building, human resource, and economic challenges. Conclusions: The challenges identified in this study were grouped into six primary categories, with the roots of these challenges linked to issues related to educational organizations, personnel capabilities, and the design of AI systems. Recognizing the challenges of using AI in nursing education can not only prevent unintended problems but also aid in preserving economic and human resources.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Knowledge about AI risks does not automatically translate into responsible interaction practices.
“The difference between awareness and critical engagement suggests that knowledge about AI risks does not automatically translate into responsible interaction practices, reinforcing arguments for stronger AI literacy and pedagogical scaffolding [6, 17, 28].”
From From adoption to interaction: examining human-GenAI engagement patterns, ethical tensions, and educational trade-offs in nursing education (2026) · cites this paper as [17]
Cites
The rise of artificial intelligence in healthcare applications
Bohr, A., & Memarzadeh, K. (2020) · Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818438-7.00002-2 · Cited by 1,636 · see citing works
Ronquillo, C. E., Peltonen, L., Pruinelli, L., Chu, C. H., Bakken, S., Beduschi, A., Cato, K., Hardiker, N., Junger, A., Michalowski, M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.14855 · Cited by 453 · see citing works
Predicted Influences of Artificial Intelligence on Nursing Education: Scoping Review
Buchanan, C., Howitt, M. L., Wilson, R., Booth, R. G., Risling, T., & Bamford, M. (2021) · JMIR Nursing · doi:10.2196/23933 · Cited by 326 · see citing works
Application Scenarios for Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Care: Rapid Review
Seibert, K., Domhoff, D., Bruch, D., Schulte-Althoff, M., Fürstenau, D., Biessmann, F., & Wolf-Ostermann, K. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/26522 · Cited by 314 · see citing works
The state of artificial intelligence in nursing education: past, present, and future directions
De Gagne, J. C. (2023) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph20064884 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Srinivasan, M., Venugopal, A., Venkatesan, L., & Kumar, R. (2024) · JMIR Nursing · doi:10.2196/52105 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Challenges for future directions for artificial intelligence integrated nursing simulation education
Jung, S. (2023) · Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing · doi:10.4069/kjwhn.2023.09.06.1 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
El-Banna, M. M., Sajid, M. R., Rizvi, M. R., Sami, W., & McNelis, A. M. (2025) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1681784 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Yang, M., Long, J., He, Y., Meng, R., Ling, C., Long, Q., & Wen, J. (2026) · BMC Nursing · doi:10.1186/s12912-026-05132-7
- Authors
- Dehghani, M., Pourasad, M. H., & Khezri, H.
- Affiliations
- Urmia University (IR)
- Corresponding author
- Pourasad, Mohammad Hossein
- Venue
- Educational Research in Medical Sciences
- Publisher
- Brieflands
- Published
- 2025-05-31
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2252-0341 (ISSN-L)
- 2252-0465
- OpenAlex
- W4410965487
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 0.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Educational research in medical sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, nursing education, implementation barriers, educational challenges, technical challenges, ethical considerations, trust building, HRM challenges, economic problems, AI system design, employee competence
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