ArticlePloS one2025
Embracing AI in academia: A mixed methods study of nursing students' and educators' perspectives on using ChatGPT.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Nurse educators' experiences and perceptions using generative artificial intelligence: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- A Meta-synthesis of nursing students' experiences with generative artificial intelligence-assisted learning.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Compassion and Self-Compassion in Relation to Nursing Students' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Medical students' attitudes, usage patterns, and associated factors with DeepSeek adoption in education: a cross-sectional study in China.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Nursing undergraduates' experiences of generative AI-assisted learning in the classroom environment: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Educational Applications of AI-Based Chatbots in Nursing: A Scoping Review.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Review
- Undergraduate nursing students' attitudes and needs regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence in professional learning: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT is reshaping academic practice, particularly in nursing education. Understanding how nursing students and educators perceive and interact with ChatGPT is essential for its responsible and effective use in both academic and clinical contexts. This study aimed to explore knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, and concerns related to ChatGPT among nursing students and educators and to identify potential factors associated with its use in academia.
methodsA convergent parallel mixed-methods design was conducted at a Saudi nursing college. Quantitative data were collected from a convenience sample of 240 students and 40 nurse educators using validated self-reported questionnaires. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, ANOVA, Pearson's correlation, and regression analysis. Qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with 20 students and 15 educators and analyzed thematically.
resultsParticipants demonstrated moderate knowledge and generally positive attitudes and perceptions toward ChatGPT. Educators expressed stronger ethical concerns, particularly regarding plagiarism, over-reliance, and data accuracy. Regression analysis demonstrated that knowledge significantly predicted perceptions and attitudes, with strong predictive power (p < 0.001). Also, ChatGPT experience, academic level, and years of experience as significant predictors of knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes (p ≤ 0.05), with ChatGPT experience showing the strongest predictive power. Thematic analysis yielded four main themes and 22 subthemes: uses of ChatGPT, benefits, concerns, and suggestions for improvement.
conclusionChatGPT holds promising potential in nursing education, supporting academic productivity and digital competence. However, concerns about ethical use, content accuracy, and discipline alignment remain. Integrating AI literacy training, ethical guidelines, and discipline-specific adaptations is essential to maximize ChatGPT's benefits and support its safe and effective use in nursing academia.
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.