ArticleSAGE open nursing
Navigating Professional Accountability in AI-Assisted Nursing Practice: Ethical and Legal Imperatives for the Digital Age.
Article in SAGE open nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Algorithmic Moral Burden: Pope Leo XIV, Conscience, and Professional Agency in AI-Supported Philippine Healthcare.Journal of religion and health · 2026Article
- Social Status and Clinical Resource Allocation by a Large Language Model: An Evaluation of 30,618 Decisions.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- The Risks to Patients Associated with Using Artificial Intelligence Tools in Pharmacy Practice: A Scoping Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into clinical decision-making has introduced unprecedented ambiguity regarding professional accountability when AI-assisted care results in adverse patient outcomes. Nurses, positioned as frontline users of AI clinical decision support systems, face a complex landscape where traditional notions of professional responsibility intersect with algorithmic opacity, shared decision-making processes, and evolving legal frameworks. This commentary examines the accountability challenges confronting nurses in AI-enabled practice environments, exploring the ethical tensions between following AI-CDSS recommendations and exercising independent clinical judgment. The commentary argues that clear frameworks for responsibility attribution, robust institutional policies, and strengthened professional guidance are urgently needed to protect both patients and nurses as AI becomes increasingly embedded in healthcare delivery.
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.