ArticleJournal of nursing management2026
Measuring Positive and Negative Attitudes Associated With the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Profession: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Analysis of ASUAITIN.
Article in Journal of nursing management, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Change Fatigue and Attitudes Toward AI in County-Level Nurses: The Mediating Role of AI Literacy.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Measuring Positive and Negative Attitudes Associated With the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Nursing Profession: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Analysis of ASUAITIN.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) technologies have appeared in many specific clinical nursing scenarios, but its actual adoption effect remains challenging. Assessing nurses' attitude toward the use of artificial intelligence technologies will help optimize the integration of AI technologies in the field of nursing.
aimThe aim of this study is to cross-culturally adapt the Attitude Scale towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Nursing (ASUAITIN) to the Chinese nursing cultural context and verify its reliability and validity in the nurse population.
methodsThis cross-sectional study adhered to the STROBE guidelines and was designed to translate the ASUAITIN into Chinese. Experts and clinical nurses were invited to discuss and modify the content and concepts, as well as to assess its alignment with the Chinese cultural context. A total of 436 clinical nurses from 20 hospitals in Fujian Province, China, were surveyed from March to April 2025, and the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of ASUAITIN were evaluated.
resultsThe Chinese version of ASUAITIN consists of 15 items and 2 dimensions, namely, positive attitude and negative attitude, which demonstrates acceptable content validity. Exploratory factor analysis showed that the scale consists of 2 factors, explaining 68.92% of the total variance, with loadings of each factor ranging from 0.704 to 0.912. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor structure and indicated acceptable model fit and good convergent validity and was able to fully represent the scale structure. Meanwhile, the internal consistency and test-retest reliability were satisfactory.
conclusionThe Chinese version of ASUAITIN showed acceptable validity and reliability and can, therefore, be used to assess Chinese nurses' attitudes toward the use of AI technologies. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The scale provides the nursing management with a practical tool to assess nurses' attitudes toward the use of AI technologies and promote smoother integration of AI technologies. It supports targeted training programs to enhance nurses' AI application.
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.