Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40453810›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Critical activities for successful implementation and adoption of AI in healthcare: towards a process framework for healthcare organizations.

Monika Nair, Jens Nygren, Per Nilsen, Fabio Gama, Margit Neher, Ingrid Larsson, Petra Svedberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Monika NairSchool of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Jens NygrenSchool of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Per NilsenSchool of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Fabio GamaSchool of Business, Innovation and Sustainability, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Margit NeherSchool of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Ingrid LarssonSchool of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.
Petra SvedbergSchool of Health and Welfare, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Absence of structured guidelines to navigate the complexities of implementing AI-based applications in healthcare is recognized by clinicians, healthcare leaders, and policy makers. AI implementation presents challenges beyond the technology development which necessitates standardized approaches to implementation. This study aims to explore the activities typical to implementation of AI-based systems to develop an AI implementation process framework intended to guide healthcare professionals. The Quality Implementation Framework (QIF) was considered as an initial reference framework. Methods: This study employed a qualitative research design and included three components: (1) a review of 30 scientific articles describing differences empirical cases of real-world AI implementation in healthcare, (2) analysis of qualitative interviews with healthcare representatives possessing first-hand experience in planning, running, and sustaining AI implementation projects, (3) analysis of qualitative interviews with members of the research group´s network and purposively sampled for their AI literacy and academic, technical or managerial leadership roles. Results: The data were deductively mapped onto the steps of QIF using direct qualitative content analysis. All the phases and steps in QIF are relevant to AI implementation in healthcare, but there are specificities in the context of AI that require incorporation of additional activities and phases. To effectively support the AI implementations, the process frameworks should include a dedicated phase to implementation with specific activities that occur after planning, ensuring a smooth transition from AI's design to deployment, and a phase focused on governance and sustainability, aimed at maintaining the AI's long-term impact. The component of continuous engagement of diverse stakeholders should be incorporated throughout the lifecycle of the AI implementation. Conclusion: The value of this study is the identified processual phases and activities specific and typical to AI implementations to be carried out by an adopting healthcare organization when AI systems are deployed. The study advances previous research by outlining the types of necessary comprehensive assessments and legal preparations located in the implementation planning phase. It also extends prior understanding of what the staff's training should focus on throughout different phases of implementation. Finally, the overall processual, phased structure is discussed in order to incorporate activities that lead to a successful deployment of AI systems in healthcare.

Indexed as

adoptionartificial intelligencedeploymentframeworkhealthcareimplementationprocess

Identifiers

PMID40453810
PMCPMC12122488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.