ArticleFlorence Nightingale journal of nursing2026
Evaluation of the Reliability and Quality of Nursing Care Plans Produced by Artificial Intelligence Models for Patients Experiencing Anaphylactic Shock: A Methodological and Exploratory Investigation.
Article in Florence Nightingale journal of 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to develop and validate a ChatGPT 4.0 and DeepSeek V3 model-supported nursing care plan for patients with anaphylactic shock.
methodsThe type of study is methodological and exploratory research. The research consists of three phases and six steps. Phase 1: Patient Scenario Development: (1) literature review and (2) scenario creation. Phase 2: Nursing Care Plan Development: (3) identification of patient care needs and (4) generation of a scenario-based nursing care plan by AI. Phase 3: Validation of the Nursing Care Plan: (5) expert review and validation of the AI-generated nursing care plan and (6) assessment of the nursing care plan's readability. ChatGPT 4.0 and DeepSeek V3 were employed to create nursing care plans. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation scale was utilized to evaluate the quality of nursing care plans. The intraclass correlation coefficient was utilized to assess the inter-rater reliability of the evaluation tool. The analysis of readability was conducted utilizing the Ateşman, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, the Gunning Fog Index, and the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook formula.
resultsA notable difference emerged between the models in the Nursing Assessment section, as experts assigned higher scores to ChatGPT 4.0 (p < .005). No significant differences were found among the artificial intelligence models in other sections (p > .05). DeepSeek V3 exhibited an elevated readability level, indicated by a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 13.19, a Gunning Fog Index of 17.20, and an Simple Measure of Gobbledygook score of 9.91.
conclusionNursing care plans designed with artificial intelligence support are sufficiently readable and applicable for nurses. Cite this article as: Soylu, A., & Soylu, D. (2026). Evaluation of the reliability and quality of nursing care plans produced by artificial intelligence models for patients experiencing anaphylactic shock: a methodological and exploratory investigation. Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing, 34, 0162, doi: 10.5152/FNJN.2026.25162.
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.