Cited by 190Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence Applications

Harnessing the Power of AI: A Comprehensive Review of Its Impact and Challenges in Nursing Science and Healthcare

Open access
Yelne, Seema, Chaudhary, Minakshi, Dod, Karishma, Sayyad, Akhtaribano, Sharma, Ranjana·2023·Cureus

Abstract

This comprehensive review delves into the impact and challenges of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in nursing science and healthcare. AI has already demonstrated its transformative potential in these fields, with applications spanning from personalized care and diagnostic accuracy to predictive analytics and telemedicine. However, the integration of AI has its complexities, including concerns related to data privacy, ethical considerations, and biases in algorithms and datasets. The future of healthcare appears promising, with AI poised to advance diagnostics, treatment, and healthcare practices. Nevertheless, it is crucial to remember that AI should complement, not replace, healthcare professionals, preserving the essential human element of care. To maximize AI's potential in healthcare, interdisciplinary collaboration, ethical guidelines, and the protection of patient rights are essential. This review concludes with a call to action, emphasizing the need for ongoing research and collective efforts to ensure that AI contributes to improved healthcare outcomes while upholding the highest standards of ethics and patient-centered care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7759/cureus.49252

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The absence of standardized AI literacy programs and insufficient integration of AI concepts into nursing curricula limit the preparedness of future nurses to engage effectively with these technologies.

    “The absence of standardized AI literacy programs and insufficient integration of AI concepts into nursing curricula limit the preparedness of future nurses to engage effectively with these technologies [39,47].”

    From The Role of AI in Nursing Education and Practice: Umbrella Review (2025) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Review section says nursing curricula must incorporate AI coursework to prepare future nurses to use AI effectively. It does not establish that standardized AI literacy programs are absent or document the current extent of AI integration in nursing curricula. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The 18 included studies collectively explored diverse applications of AI in nursing across research, practice, and education.

    “The 18 included studies in this umbrella review collectively explored the diverse applications of AI in nursing across research, practice, and education [32-49].”
  • This disconnect hinders the realization of AI's transformative potential in real-world nursing environments.

    “This disconnect hinders the realization of AI’s transformative potential in real-world nursing environments, where systemic barriers such as financial constraints, infrastructure readiness, and workforce training remain inadequately addressed [39,45].”
  • Systemic barriers such as financial constraints, infrastructure readiness, and workforce training remain inadequately addressed.

    “where systemic barriers such as financial constraints, infrastructure readiness, and workforce training remain inadequately addressed [39,45].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [66]Patient Safety: Achieving a New Standard for Care National Academies Press Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Data Standards for Patient Safety Washington, DC National Academies Press 2004 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25009854/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yelne, S., Chaudhary, M., Dod, K., Sayyad, A., & Sharma, R.
Affiliations
Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research (IN)
Corresponding author
Yelne, Seema
Venue
Cureus
Published
2023-11-22
Volume
15
Issue
11
Pages
e49252-e49252
ISSN
2168-8184 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4388895516
Cited by
190
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 1
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Cureus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, nursing science, individualized care, diagnostic accuracy, predictive analytics, telemedicine, data privacy, algorithmic bias, AI ethics, patient-centered care, interdisciplinary collaboration

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