ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Role reconstruction among double-qualified nursing educators in the generative AI era: a qualitative study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Generative AI (GenAI) is rapidly integrating into nursing education, acting as a novel tool for knowledge mediation. While it offers new learning opportunities, its application risks disrupting essential social interactions and clinical contextualization. Double-qualified nursing educators (DQNEs) play a pivotal role in navigating this technological shift. Objectives: This study adopts a social constructivist framework to examine the pedagogical functional boundaries of GenAI in nursing education and to analyze how DQNEs reconstruct their roles to facilitate knowledge co-construction and clinical meaning-making. Design: A qualitative study using semi-structured focus group interviews. Methods: The study was conducted at a medical college in eastern China. Eighteen DQNEs with experience in GenAI integration participated. Data were collected through three focus group discussions and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key themes. Results: Three key themes emerged: (1) Application value of GenAI in nursing education, where GenAI served as a scaffolding tool to trigger cognitive conflict, support differentiated instruction, and bridge theory with simulated scenarios; (2) Core obstacles to GenAI application, revealing challenges of tool dependency displacing human interaction, erosion of teacher authority, and institutional ambiguity; and (3) Adaptive pedagogical strategies for anchoring learning in clinical practice, where teachers employed deconstruction and reconstruction strategies and enforced social rules to anchor AI-generated plans in clinical practice. Conclusion: GenAI functions as a double-edged mediating tool that can expand the zone of proximal development but also threatens to social learning. To mitigate epistemic risks, DQNEs must evolve from information transmitters to contextual anchors, guiding students to validate GenAI outputs against clinical reality.
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.