Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 41841218

Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Nursing Clinical Decision-Making: An Umbrella Review.

Robyn Cant·Colleen Ryan·Ritesh Chugh
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

AIM: To describe contemporary peer-reviewed literature on artificial intelligence in nurses' clinical decision-making. METHODS: An umbrella review of literature reviews. DATA SOURCES: Four major databases were searched for reviews published between 2019 and 2024. RESULTS: Sixteen literature reviews reported on 965 nursing artificial intelligence primary studies. The studies focused on technology development and emerging performance evaluations, whilst real-world testing or implementation in nursing clinical settings was rare. Rigorous comparative analyses were lacking. While artificial intelligence demonstrates promise in decision-making, challenges such as a lack of controlled studies, algorithmic bias, limited reproducibility and insufficient clinical trials hinder its practical impact. Ethical concerns, transparency and patient data privacy issues pose barriers to AI integration in nursing practice. Ethical and legal guidelines for patient privacy are needed and should be taught along with AI literacy training for nurses. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence has the potential to enhance clinical nursing decision-making, although evidence is limited by too few examples of nurse participation during development. Underutilisation in administrative nursing functions hinders implementation. Nurses should assume a central role in the design and development of AI applications to ensure that these technologies address the realities of nursing practice. With such improvements, artificial intelligence can transform nursing practice, improve nurses' clinical decision-making and ultimately enhance consumer healthcare outcomes. PATIENT OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: No Patient or Public Involvement. REPORTING METHOD: While there is no reporting checklist for umbrella reviews, the PRISMA guide for systematic reviews was followed.

Explore related subjects

Artificial IntelligenceHumansClinical Decision-Makingartificial intelligenceclinical decision‐makingdata analyticsmachine learningnursingJournal ArticleSystematic ReviewReview

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Robyn Cant, Colleen Ryan, Ritesh Chugh. 2026-03-17. Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Nursing Clinical Decision-Making: An Umbrella Review.. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.70579

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Artificial Intelligence subjectHumans subjectJournal Article subjectJournal Article; Systematic Review; Review resourceMachine Learning subjectSystematic reviews study

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

AI-driven snapshot hyperspectral imaging for on-line sorting systems in food industry: From real-time sensing to intelligent decision-making.

High-throughput food sorting requires rapid, non-destructive detection of external defects, foreign materials, and internal quality attributes in heterogeneous food matrices. Conventional scanning hyperspectral imaging may suffer from motion-induced spatial-spectral mismatches, whereas snapshot hyperspectral imaging (S-HSI) captures spectral images within a single integration time. However, its advantage is limited by trade-offs in resolution, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), reconstruction uncertainty, and calibration stability, which are further amplified by variable tissue structure, surface reflection, moisture, and fat distribution in foods. This review critically examines artificial intelligence (AI)-driven S-HSI for on-line food sorting within a sensing-representation-decision-execution framework. Compact architectures are compared according to their physical constraints, food-sorting suitability, and ability to support mapping between spectral responses and physicochemical quality attributes. AI strategies are reviewed for spectral reconstruction, image restoration, spatial-spectral representation, band selection, uncertainty-aware decision-making, and edge implementation. AI can partially compensate for snapshot-specific limitations, but current evidence remains largely limited to laboratory or prototype studies. Future work should link system performance to food safety and quality outcomes by reporting throughput, decision latency, calibration drift, missed-detection risk, false-rejection cost, and closed-loop sorting success.

Hyperspectral Imaging↗
PubMed2026

Privacy, security, and reliability risks of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a systematic review of empirical evidence.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into healthcare information systems, supporting clinical decision-making, imaging analysis, and predictive modeling. While these applications offer operational and clinical benefits, they also introduce emerging risks to patient privacy, data security, and system reliability. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review empirical evidence on privacy breaches, security vulnerabilities, and misuse associated with AI applications in healthcare settings. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library were searched for empirical studies published between January 2015 and November 2025 that evaluated AI use or misuse in clinical diagnosis, treatment, or decision-making. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data using a standardized form. Findings were synthesized narratively due to heterogeneity in study designs, AI methods, and reported outcomes. RESULTS: Of 7,285 records identified through database searches and 205 through citation screening, 22 empirical studies met the inclusion criteria, spanning multiple clinical domains and data modalities, predominantly medical imaging applications. Five recurring threat categories were identified: patient re-identification, membership inference, unauthorized access and adversarial exploitation, input manipulation, and misuse or overinterpretation of AI outputs. Across studies, AI models were shown to encode latent biometric signals across diverse data types, limiting the effectiveness of traditional anonymization and synthetic data approaches. Adversarial attacks and input manipulation were also shown to compromise diagnostic performance and system integrity. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides empirical evidence suggesting that contemporary AI systems in healthcare introduce privacy and security risks that may challenge traditional assumptions about data protection. These findings underscore the need for privacy- and security-by-design approaches and governance frameworks that address risks across the AI lifecycle.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Artificial intelligence for dental caries detection: An umbrella review.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been proposed as a tool to improve dental caries detection across imaging modalities; however, its clinical value remains uncertain. This umbrella review aimed to synthesize and critically appraise systematic reviews evaluating AI for caries detection and diagnosis. An umbrella review was conducted following PRIOR guidance (PROSPERO CRD420261340728). Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to 15 March 2026. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2, and overlap of primary studies was quantified using the corrected covered area (CCA). Seventeen systematic reviews were included, of which five reported diagnostic test accuracy meta-analyses using bivariate or HSROC models. Across these meta-analyses, pooled sensitivity ranged from 0.76 to 0.94 and specificity from 0.85 to 0.91. Most systems were based on deep learning models applied to bitewing radiographs and intraoral photographs. However, substantial heterogeneity was observed in imaging modalities, lesion thresholds, analytical tasks, and evaluation metrics. In addition, a high degree of overlap across reviews and recurrent methodological limitations, including reliance on retrospective datasets, limited external validation, and inconsistent reporting, substantially weaken the reliability of the evidence. Although AI models demonstrate high diagnostic performance under experimental conditions, current evidence does not support their use as stand-alone diagnostic tools. Their clinical applicability remains limited, and implementation should be restricted to decision-support contexts until robust prospective validation demonstrates meaningful impact on clinical decision-making and patient outcomes.

Dental Caries↗