Nurses' responses to patients' use of artificial intelligence for health information: a scoping review

Artificial intelligence tools — large language model chatbots, symptom checkers, AI-based interpretation of wearable-device data, and AI-generated or AI-translated medical content — are increasingly used by patients and families to obtain health information, which they then bring into clinical encounters. This shifts part of nurses' work from providing health information toward identifying, appraising, and calibrating patient-acquired information, including correcting misinformation, addressing questions rooted in AI-generated advice, and negotiating situations where AI-derived information conflicts with professional care recommendations. Two parallel strands exist in the nursing literature: (a) internet-era research on "internet-informed patients" and nurses' responses (L___), and (b) research on nurse–clinical-AI interaction (L___). The intersection — patients' use of AI for health information and nurses' responses — has not been systematically mapped: concept boundaries are unclear, evidence is scattered, and much of it is descriptive or anecdotal. This scoping review aims to map the extent, range, and nature of evidence at this intersection, clarify concepts, describe how nurse responses are studied and measured, and identify evidence gaps to inform practice guidance, health-education strategies, and future primary research. AI-specific evidence is at an early stage; a limited number of eligible Tier 1 sources is anticipated, and a nascent-evidence finding will be reported candidly rather than compensated for by post hoc broadening of eligibility. Citation note: every factual claim in the background must carry an L number; the PMIDs listed in Section 3 are candidate sources, but full citation fields must be completed from the retrieved full texts.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Open Science Framework
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/xn6b3
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Nurses' responses to patients' use of artificial intelligence for health information: a scoping review

YuXiao Zhu
5 links
Open Science Framework
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Nurses' responses to patients' use of artificial intelligence for health information: a scoping review

YuXiao Zhu
article en

Abstract

Artificial intelligence tools — large language model chatbots, symptom checkers, AI-based interpretation of wearable-device data, and AI-generated or AI-translated medical content — are increasingly used by patients and families to obtain health information, which they then bring into clinical encounters. This shifts part of nurses' work from providing health information toward identifying, appraising, and calibrating patient-acquired information, including correcting misinformation, addressing questions rooted in AI-generated advice, and negotiating situations where AI-derived information conflicts with professional care recommendations. Two parallel strands exist in the nursing literature: (a) internet-era research on "internet-informed patients" and nurses' responses (L___), and (b) research on nurse–clinical-AI interaction (L___). The intersection — patients' use of AI for health information and nurses' responses — has not been systematically mapped: concept boundaries are unclear, evidence is scattered, and much of it is descriptive or anecdotal. This scoping review aims to map the extent, range, and nature of evidence at this intersection, clarify concepts, describe how nurse responses are studied and measured, and identify evidence gaps to inform practice guidance, health-education strategies, and future primary research. AI-specific evidence is at an early stage; a limited number of eligible Tier 1 sources is anticipated, and a nascent-evidence finding will be reported candidly rather than compensated for by post hoc broadening of eligibility. Citation note: every factual claim in the background must carry an L number; the PMIDs listed in Section 3 are candidate sources, but full citation fields must be completed from the retrieved full texts.

Open Science Framework
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon