Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Public Health

Sec. Public Health Education and Promotion

Volume 13 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1672140

This article is part of the Research TopicAI in Public Health Teaching and Education: Current Trends and Future OutlookView all 3 articles

The Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) of Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Qualitative Study of Undergraduate Nursing Students

Provisionally accepted
You  YuanYou Yuan1,2*Jing  FuJing Fu2,3Lanlan  LengLanlan Leng2Zhuosi  WenZhuosi Wen2Xiaoman  WeiXiaoman Wei2Die  HanDie Han1,2Xinyang  HuXinyang Hu4Yu  LiangYu Liang1Qian  LuoQian Luo1,2Xia  ZhangXia Zhang1,2Rujun  HuRujun Hu1,2*
  • 1Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China
  • 2Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China
  • 3Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospita Bijie Hospital, Bijie, China
  • 4Zunyi Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Zunyi, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Background: While Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) is increasingly applied in nursing education, research on undergraduates' perceptions, experiences, and impacts remains limited. Objective: This study aims to explore undergraduate nursing students' perceptions of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) associated with Gen AI through qualitative research methods. Methods: Using the SWOT analysis framework as the theoretical basis, data were collected through semi-structured interviews with nursing undergraduates via convenience sampling from May to July 2025 until saturation, and analysed using Colaizzi's phenomenological method for thematic extraction. Results: A total of 36 nursing undergraduates were interviewed, from whom four main themes and sixteen sub-themes were identified. These were categorized into internal and external factors. Internal positive factors (Strengths) included personalized learning assistance, skill training and curriculum support, efficiency and cognitive expansion, and data processing and learning capability. Internal negative factors (Weaknesses) involved ethical and legal risks, the generation of low-quality or inaccurate outputs, technical barriers, and cognitive and learning risks. External opportunities comprised policy and resource support, technological advancement and evolution, interdisciplinary integration and collaboration, and emerging career opportunities. External threats included technological adaptation and cost risks, digital divide and equity gap, job displacement risk, and educational integrity risk. Conclusion: Undergraduate nursing students regard generative AI as a double-edged sword—its strengths in boosting learning efficiency, broadening knowledge access and simulating clinical decisions are offset by ethical, technological and equity challenges. Nursing education must therefore strengthen technical guidance, ethics training and resource optimisation to maximise its strengths and opportunities while minimising its weaknesses and threats.

Keywords: Generative artificial intelligence, Undergraduate nursing students, SWOT Analysis, Education, qualitative study

Received: 24 Jul 2025; Accepted: 25 Aug 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Yuan, Fu, Leng, Wen, Wei, Han, Hu, Liang, Luo, Zhang and Hu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence:
You Yuan, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China
Rujun Hu, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.