ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2024
Current trends and future implications in the utilization of ChatGPT in nursing: A rapid review.
Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The application of ChatGPT in nursing: a bibliometric and visualized analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- AI-Based Learning Experiences of Nursing Students: A Qualitative Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Information Generated by ChatGPT on Preventing Peripheral Venous Catheter-Related Infections.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Evaluation of AI language models in answering pregnancy-related questions assessed by obstetrics specialists.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Large Language Models in Nursing Education: Concept Analysis.JMIR nursing · 2025Review
- Chat generative pre-trained transformers era: pros and cons between nursing researchers in Egypt.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- ChatGPT Applications in Nursing: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Nursing open · 2025Review
- The current status, knowledge, attitudes, and challenges of generative artificial intelligence use among undergraduate nursing students: a single-center cross-sectional survey of western China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Research Progress and Clinical Implications of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Perinatal Health Care for Advanced Maternal Age Pregnant Women.International journal of women's health · 2025Review
- Augmenting Community Nursing Practice With Generative AI: A Formative Study of Diagnostic Synergies Using Simulation-Based Clinical Cases.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The past decade has witnessed a surge in the development of artificial intelligence (AI)-based technology systems for healthcare. Launched in November 2022, ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer), an AI-based Chatbot, is being utilized in nursing education, research and practice. However, little is known about its pattern of usage, which prompted this study. Objective: To provide a concise overview of the existing literature on the application of ChatGPT in nursing education, practice and research. Methods: A rapid review based on the Cochrane methodology was applied to synthesize existing literature. We conducted systematic searches in several databases, including CINAHL, Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Education Search Complete, ERIC, and Cochrane CENTRAL, to ensure no publications were missed. All types of primary and secondary research studies, including qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods, and literature reviews published in the English language focused on the use of ChatGPT in nursing education, research, and practice, were included. Dissertations or theses, conference proceedings, government and other organizational reports, white papers, discussion papers, opinion pieces, editorials, commentaries, and published review protocols were excluded. Studies involving other healthcare professionals and/or students without including nursing participants were excluded. Studies exploring other language models without comparison to ChatGPT and those examining the technical specifications of ChatGPT were excluded. Data screening was completed in two stages: titles and abstract and full-text review, followed by data extraction and quality appraisal. Descriptive analysis and narrative synthesis were applied to summarize and categorize the findings. Results: Seventeen studies were included: 15 (88.2 %) focused on nursing education and one each on nursing practice and research. Of the 17 included studies, 5 (29.4 %) were evaluation studies, 3 (17.6 %) were narrative reviews, 3 (17.6 %) were cross-sectional studies, 2 (11.8 %) were descriptive studies, and 1 (5.9 %) was a randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental study, case study, and qualitative study, respectively. Conclusion: This study has provided a snapshot of ChatGPT usage in nursing education, research, and practice. Although evidence is inconclusive, integration of ChatGPT should consider addressing ethical concerns and ongoing education on ChatGPT usage. Further research, specifically interventional studies, is recommended to ascertain and track the impact of ChatGPT in different contexts.
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.