Predicted Influences of Artificial Intelligence on Nursing Education: Scoping Review (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND It is predicted that artificial intelligence (AI) will transform nursing across all domains of nursing practice, including administration, clinical care, education, policy, and research. Increasingly, researchers are exploring the potential influences of AI health technologies (AIHTs) on nursing in general and on nursing education more specifically. However, little emphasis has been placed on synthesizing this body of literature. OBJECTIVE A scoping review was conducted to summarize the current and predicted influences of AIHTs on nursing education over the next 10 years and beyond. METHODS This scoping review followed a previously published protocol from April 2020. Using an established scoping review methodology, the databases of MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central, Education Resources Information Centre, Scopus, Web of Science, and Proquest were searched. In addition to the use of these electronic databases, a targeted website search was performed to access relevant grey literature. Abstracts and full-text studies were independently screened by two reviewers using prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included literature focused on nursing education and digital health technologies that incorporate AI. Data were charted using a structured form and narratively summarized into categories. RESULTS A total of 27 articles were identified (20 expository papers, six studies with quantitative or prototyping methods, and one qualitative study). The population included nurses, nurse educators, and nursing students at the entry-to-practice, undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral levels. A variety of AIHTs were discussed, including virtual avatar apps, smart homes, predictive analytics, virtual or augmented reality, and robots. The two key categories derived from the literature were (1) influences of AI on nursing education in academic institutions and (2) influences of AI on nursing education in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS Curricular reform is urgently needed within nursing education programs in academic institutions and clinical practice settings to prepare nurses and nursing students to practice safely and efficiently in the age of AI. Additionally, nurse educators need to adopt new and evolving pedagogies that incorporate AI to better support students at all levels of education. Finally, nursing students and practicing nurses must be equipped with the requisite knowledge and skills to effectively assess AIHTs and safely integrate those deemed appropriate to support person-centered compassionate nursing care in practice settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/17490
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,022 | 0,116 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,016 | 0,017 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,014 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».