ArticleBMC nursing2026
The application of digital technology in nursing quality management: a scoping review.
Article in BMC nursing, 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
backgroundDigital technology integrates information and communication tools such as electronic health records, wearable devices, and artificial intelligence, which has become an important driving force for optimizing nursing quality management. However, existing studies on the application of digital technology in nursing quality management are fragmented, with unclear conceptual boundaries and lack of systematic evidence mapping. This scoping review aims to systematically map the application landscape of digital technology in nursing quality management, summarize its effectiveness and limitations, and identify knowledge gaps.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological framework and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A systematic literature search was performed from the database inception to June 1, 2025, in seven electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), China Biomedical Database (CBM). Two researchers independently completed the literature search, screening, and data extraction, with disagreements resolved by a third researcher. Data synthesis was conducted through inductive thematic analysis and evidence mapping based on the Donabedian structure-process-outcome model.
resultsThe initial literature search retrieved 992 records, and 16 studies (4 Chinese, 12 English) were included in the final analysis. Evidence mapping based on the Donabedian model identified three application dimensions: (1) Structural: EHRs and AI-assisted systems improved data standardization; (2) Process: real-time monitoring, virtual training, and digital safety controls enhanced care delivery and patient engagement; (3) Outcome: included studies described improvements in nursing efficiency, safety, and satisfaction; however, these reports derived from heterogeneous study designs and outcome measures, precluding pooled estimates of effectiveness. Evidence remains concentrated in hospital environments, with limited representation from community and long-term care settings.
conclusionDigital technology demonstrates considerable potential to enhance nursing quality management across multiple domains, with generally positive feedback on feasibility and satisfaction reported in individual studies. However, the strength of inferences is limited by heterogeneous designs and outcome measures. However, evidence remains heterogeneous, and challenges related to technology integration, cost, training, and policy support persist. Future research should prioritize high-quality randomized trials, longitudinal evaluations, standardized outcome measures, and context-sensitive implementation strategies to strengthen the evidence base and guide scalable adoption in diverse care settings. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.