aceModerate evidence
Published recordEducationProblem Space
More
AI literacy and competency in nursing education: preparing students and faculty members for an AI-enabled future-a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Truvace record
- TRV-2026-2826raw data (JSON)
- Version
- v1Published
- First published
- Evidence type
- Systematic review or meta-analysis
- Sources
- 1 sourcePeer-reviewed
- sha256
- 3e449a2dcc42…check it
Introduction: Artificial Intelligence (AI) has made its way into every dimension of human life, and its impact is significant and multifaceted. Specifically, the effect of AI in nursing education has reshaped the healthcare system. However, this technological shift in nursing and the healthcare system still needs to be evaluated in multiple aspects to ensure the effective use of AI and to prepare future professionals. Methods: This PROSPERO-registered systematic literature review and meta-analysis explored the i…
The problem
A systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 quantitative studies found a pooled AI implementation rate of 67% in nursing groups, but only 55% among working nurses against 78% among students.
What this doesn’t fix
Variation between studies was extreme (I2 above 97%), and most included studies came from high- and middle-income countries, so the pooled percentages may not reflect global readiness.
Sources
1 on file- Frontiers in Medicinedoi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1681784
What the review found when it combined the studies
These are the review’s own pooled results, copied from its abstract. Truvace did not recalculate them.
Positive attitudes toward AI among nursing students, staff and faculty
Pooled proportion 71% (95% CI 63% to 78%)
16 studies · search to June 2025
The review’s own words
Meta-analysis reveals high levels of AI-related awareness (pooled estimate = 73%, 95% CI: 64-80%) and positive attitudes (71%, 95% CI: 63-78%) among various nursing groups.
AI-related awareness among nursing students, staff and faculty
Pooled proportion 73% (95% CI 64% to 80%)
16 studies · search to June 2025
The review’s own words
Meta-analysis reveals high levels of AI-related awareness (pooled estimate = 73%, 95% CI: 64-80%) and positive attitudes (71%, 95% CI: 63-78%) among various nursing groups.
Implementation of AI-related skills among nursing students, staff and faculty
Pooled proportion 67% (95% CI 55% to 78%)
13 studies · search to June 2025
The review’s own words
The point estimate of the random effect model provided a 67% AI-related implementation rate with a 95% CI (55–78%).
Code checks every number above against the review’s text before it is shown. The short labels are an AI model’s reading of that text, so the review’s own sentence sits under each one. A pooled figure is only as strong as the studies behind it. How Truvace uses pooled results
Cite this record
v1Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-2826, v1: “AI literacy and competency in nursing education: preparing students and faculty members for an AI-enabled future-a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Truvace, 2026-11-12. /record/TRV-2026-2826 (accessed on the day you copy it). sha256 3e449a2dcc4281d8…
Change history
1 versionEvery change made to this record since it was first published, and why. Nothing has changed since it went up.
Certified into the record
Check this record hasn’t been altered
How to check it yourself, without trusting this page
Download any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-2826 and hash its canonical field yourself, for example with shasum -a 256. You should get its content_hash. Each version’s text also ends with prev:and the hash of the version before it (version 1 points to 64 zeros). If anyone had changed a single character of any version after it was saved, those hashes wouldn’t line up.