ReviewOpen research Europe2021
Leveraging the trust of nurses to advance a digital agenda in Europe: a critical review of health policy literature.
Review in Open research Europe, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Opportunities, challenges, and requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) implementation in Primary Health Care (PHC): a systematic review.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Nurses' Engagement in Digital Health Clinical Trials Using Unobtrusive Monitoring Technologies: Constructivist Grounded Theory Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Mobile apps, AI, and teletherapy: a comprehensive review of digital mental health tools for nurses.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Personalized AI for workplace health promotion: performance management and healthcare worker engagement through digital analytics.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article is a critical and integrative review of health policy literature examining artificial intelligence (AI) and its implications for healthcare systems and the frontline nursing workforce. A key focus is on co-creation as essential for the deployment and adoption of AI. Our review hinges on the European Commission's White Paper on Artificial Intelligence from 2020, which provides a useful roadmap. The value of health data spaces and electronic health records (EHRs) is considered; and the role of advanced nurse practitioners in harnessing the potential of AI tools in their practice is articulated. Finally, this paper examines "trust" as a precondition for the successful deployment and adoption of AI in Europe. AI applications in healthcare can enhance safety and quality, and mitigate against common risks and challenges, once the necessary level of trust is achieved among all stakeholders. Such an approach can enable effective preventative care across healthcare settings, particularly community and primary care. However, the acceptance of AI tools in healthcare is dependent on the robustness, validity and reliability of data collected and donated from EHRs. Nurse stakeholders have a key role to play in this regard, since trust can only be fostered through engaging frontline end-users in the co-design of EHRs and new AI tools. Nurses hold an intimate understanding of the direct benefits of such technology, such as releasing valuable nursing time for essential patient care, and empowering patients and their family members as recipients of nursing care. This article brings together insights from a unique group of stakeholders to explore the interaction between AI, the co-creation of data spaces and EHRs, and the role of the frontline nursing workforce. We identify the pre-conditions needed for successful deployment of AI and offer insights regarding the importance of co-creating the future European Health Data Space.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.