Evidence Hub

Ethical and regulatory considerations in the use of AI and machine learning in nursing: A systematic review

Sobhia Ahmed Abdel Kader Mohammed, Yasmine M Osman, A. Ibrahim, Mostafa Shaban

International Nursing Review, 2025

60 citations

Abstract

AIM

This study systematically explores the ethical and regulatory considerations surrounding the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in nursing practice, with a focus on patient autonomy, data privacy, algorithmic bias, and accountability.

BACKGROUND

AI and ML are transforming nursing practice by enhancing clinical decision-making and operational efficiency. However, these technologies present significant ethical challenges related to ensuring patient autonomy, safeguarding data privacy, mitigating algorithmic bias, and ensuring transparency in decision-making processes. Current frameworks are not sufficiently tailored to nursing-specific contexts.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Six major databases were searched for studies published between 2000 and 2024. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis.

RESULTS

Five key themes emerged from the review: enhancement of clinical decision-making, promotion of ethical awareness, support for routine nursing tasks, challenges in algorithmic bias, and the importance of public engagement in regulatory frameworks. The review identified critical gaps in nursing-specific ethical guidelines and regulatory oversight for AI integration in practice.

DISCUSSION

AI technologies offer substantial benefits for nursing, particularly in decision-making and task efficiency. However, these advantages must be balanced against ethical…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free