Ethical Decision-Making in Nursing Management: Comparing Nurse Managers and Generative Artificial Intelligence

Aim: To examine nurse managers’ ethical decisions and the concordance and response stability of generative artificial intelligence in simulated management scenarios. Background: Nurse managers balance obligations to patients, staff, and organizations. Evaluating both agreement and repeated response variability is necessary when considering artificial intelligence for ethical deliberation and organizational governance. Design: An exploratory study combining a cross-sectional census at a Spanish public university hospital with repeated evaluation of three models using identical sce-narios. Methods: Models received the complete questionnaire in new web conversations. Analyses examined human response distributions, management-level variation, model concordance, and within-model stability. Reporting followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist. Results: Nurse managers converged most strongly on protective and fairness-related actions. Staffing and informed consent elicited more heterogeneous choices. Overall concordance was similar, although two models were highly stable and the third varied more across repetitions. Scenario-specific agreement differed. All models consistently diverged from the human mode in conscientious objection and informed consent. Exploratory comparisons did not establish model superiority or equivalence. Conclusion: Repeated evaluation provides a more informative account of model behavior than a single response. Aggregate agreement con-cealed distinct response patterns. Stability, professional concordance, and ethical defensibility represent separate questions; consistent outputs may still diverge from professional preferences. These findings do not establish clinical effectiveness or ethical correctness. Implications for Nursing: Leadership education should combine ethical reflection with critical appraisal of model outputs and context-sensitive justification of decisions. Implications for Health Policy: Organizational govern-ance should retain accountable nursing oversight, require local evaluation and review after model updates, and define procedures for resolving consequential disagreement.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Preprints.org
Published
2026-11-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202611.0580.v1
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
preprint

Ethical Decision-Making in Nursing Management: Comparing Nurse Managers and Generative Artificial Intelligence

Silvia Pérez‐González, Elena Andina Díaz, A. García, Víctor Vallejo Llorente et al.
Preprints.org
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
preprint

Ethical Decision-Making in Nursing Management: Comparing Nurse Managers and Generative Artificial Intelligence

Silvia Pérez‐González, Elena Andina Díaz, A. García, Víctor Vallejo Llorente, Javier Llamazares-Salas
preprint en

Abstract

Aim: To examine nurse managers’ ethical decisions and the concordance and response stability of generative artificial intelligence in simulated management scenarios. Background: Nurse managers balance obligations to patients, staff, and organizations. Evaluating both agreement and repeated response variability is necessary when considering artificial intelligence for ethical deliberation and organizational governance. Design: An exploratory study combining a cross-sectional census at a Spanish public university hospital with repeated evaluation of three models using identical sce-narios. Methods: Models received the complete questionnaire in new web conversations. Analyses examined human response distributions, management-level variation, model concordance, and within-model stability. Reporting followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist. Results: Nurse managers converged most strongly on protective and fairness-related actions. Staffing and informed consent elicited more heterogeneous choices. Overall concordance was similar, although two models were highly stable and the third varied more across repetitions. Scenario-specific agreement differed. All models consistently diverged from the human mode in conscientious objection and informed consent. Exploratory comparisons did not establish model superiority or equivalence. Conclusion: Repeated evaluation provides a more informative account of model behavior than a single response. Aggregate agreement con-cealed distinct response patterns. Stability, professional concordance, and ethical defensibility represent separate questions; consistent outputs may still diverge from professional preferences. These findings do not establish clinical effectiveness or ethical correctness. Implications for Nursing: Leadership education should combine ethical reflection with critical appraisal of model outputs and context-sensitive justification of decisions. Implications for Health Policy: Organizational govern-ance should retain accountable nursing oversight, require local evaluation and review after model updates, and define procedures for resolving consequential disagreement.

Preprints.org
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