Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41168748›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical ethics2025

Ethical challenges in the algorithmic era: a systematic rapid review of risk insights and governance pathways for nursing predictive analytics and early warning systems.

Yucheng Cao, Lili Deng, Xusheng Liu, Zhixian Feng, Yu Gao

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors.

Yucheng CaoSchool of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510006, Guangdong, China.ORCID 0009-0000-5055-4077
Lili DengSchool of Nursing, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510006, Guangdong, China.
Xusheng LiuDepartment of Nephrology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, Guangdong, China.
Zhixian FengShulan (Hang Zhou) Hospital, Hangzhou, 310004, Zhejiang, China.
Yu GaoQionghai Institute of Nursing Excellence, Qionghai, 571434, Hainan, China. ygao31@outlook.com.ORCID 0009-0004-3936-6998

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPredictive analytics and early warning systems are now widely used in nursing practice worldwide. While these tools can improve efficiency and patient safety, but at the same time posing ethical challenges related to data privacy, algorithmic fairness, accountability, professional autonomy, and patient rights. Through a systematic rapid review, we identify the major ethical risks in nursing contexts and propose actionable governance pathways to inform clinical practice and policy.

methodsThis study used a systematic rapid review, searching eight databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Ovid, EBSCOhost, and ProQuest-for English-language articles published from 2015 through May 2025. Two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data, with a third reviewer resolving disagreements, yielding 22 included studies. Using inductive thematic analysis, we summarized the ethical-risk dimensions and governance pathways of predictive analytics and early warning systems in nursing practice, and conducted an overall quality appraisal of the included literature.

resultsThe included studies came from 11 countries, with publication volume rising markedly in recent years-reflecting growing attention to ethical issues in nursing. Most were reviews or commentaries, with fewer qualitative and mixed-methods studies. Thematic analysis identified five ethical-risk dimensions: (i) Data- and Algorithm-Related Ethical Risks; (ii) Professional Role and Responsibility Attribution Risks; (iii) Patient Rights and Humane-Care Ethical Risks; (iv) Ethical-Governance and Misuse Risks; and (v) Technological Accessibility and Social Acceptance Barriers. In response, the literature proposes four governance pathways-Technical-Data Governance, Clinical Human-Machine Collaboration, Organizational-Capacity Building, and Institutional-Policy Regulation-with concrete measures including privacy protection, algorithmic-bias monitoring and fairness audits, transparency and explainability enhancement, nurse training and digital literacy, interdisciplinary collaboration and co-creation, and policy and regulatory guidelines.

conclusionsPredictive analytics and early warning systems in nursing practice show substantial promise yet are accompanied by multidimensional ethical risks. For the first time in a nursing context, this study proposes a "five ethical-risk dimensions-four governance pathways" framework, offering actionable ethical-governance guidance for nurses, administrators, and policymakers. Future work should pursue interdisciplinary, multicenter empirical studies to evaluate the framework's feasibility and effectiveness and to align technological benefits with ethical values, thereby improving nursing quality and patient safety.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsEthics, NursingConfidentialityHumansPatient RightsRisk AssessmentEarly warning systemsEthical guidelinesGovernance frameworkNursing decision supportNursing ethicsPredictive analyticsRapid review

Identifiers

PMID41168748
PMCPMC12574269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.