ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Nursing students' experiences with using generative artificial intelligence: a descriptive 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has brought new opportunities to nursing education, while raising numerous concerns. Existing research has primarily focused on nursing students' acceptance, attitudes, and willingness to use GenAI, whereas studies exploring their experiences and perceptions remain relatively limited. Objective: This study aimed to explore nursing students' experiences with and perceptions of GenAI. Methods: A descriptive qualitative study was employed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with full-time nursing students at Chongqing Medical University from March to April 2025 using purposive sampling, and the data were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: A total of 25 nursing students were interviewed, from which 3 themes and 10 subthemes were extracted: 1) perceptions and experiences of using GenAI (improving learning efficiency, concerns about information accuracy, concerns about overreliance on GenAI, and concerns about future career development); 2) factors influencing the experience of using GenAI (individual factors, information factors, and social environmental factors); and 3) expectations for integrating GenAI into nursing education (optimizing tool design, offering related courses, and promoting innovation in teaching methods). Conclusion: Nursing students in this study generally held positive but cautious attitudes toward GenAI. Although GenAI has gradually become an important support tool for learning and research among some nursing students, concerns regarding information accuracy, overreliance, and ethical and privacy risks warrant continued attention. Nursing educators should strengthen AI literacy education and guide students in using GenAI critically and responsibly. Meanwhile, efforts should be made to develop GenAI tools tailored to the needs of nursing education, strengthen education on ethical and privacy protection, and actively explore effective ways to integrate GenAI into nursing education.
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.