Exploring the potential benefits and challenges of artificial intelligence for research funding organisations: a scoping review
Blatch-Jones, A. J.; Church, H.; Crane, K.
Show abstract
BackgroundArtificial Intelligence (AI) is at the forefront of todays technological revolution, enhancing efficiency in many organisations and sectors. However, in some research environments, its adoption is tempered by the risks AI poses to data protection, ethics, and research integrity. For research funding organisations (RFOs), although there is interest in the application of AI to boost productivity, there is also uncertainty around AIs utility and its safe integration into organisational systems and processes. The scoping review explored: What does the evidence say about the current and emerging use of AI?; What are the potential benefits of AI for RFOs? and What are the considerations and risks of AI for RFOs? MethodsA scoping review was undertaken with no study, language, or field limits. Due to the rapidly evolving AI field, searches were limited to the last three years (2022-2024). Four databases were searched for academic and grey literature in February 2024 (including 13 funding and professional research organisation websites). A classification framework captured the utility and potential, and considerations and risks of AI for RFOs. Results122 eligible articles revealed that current and emerging AI solutions could potentially benefit RFOs by enhancing data processes, administration, research insights, operational management, and strategic decision-making. These solutions ranged from AI algorithms to data management platforms, frameworks, guidelines, and business models. However, several considerations and risks need to be addressed before RFOs can successfully integrate AI (e.g., improving data quality, regulating ethical use, data science training). ConclusionWhile RFOs could potentially benefit from a breadth of AI-driven solutions to improve operations, decision-making and data management, there is a need to assess organisational AI readiness. Although technological advances could be the solution there is a need to address AI accountability, governance and ethics, address societal impact, and the risks to the research funding landscape.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities 93%
- Diversity and inclusion: A hidden additional benefit of Open Data 93%
- Comparing human vs. machine-assisted analysis to develop a new approach for Big Qualitative Data Analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Conceptualizing centers of excellence: A global evidence 94%
- Ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes among healthcare workers in the United Kingdom: UK-REACH ethico-legal research, qualitative research on healthcare workers’ experiences, and stakeholder engagement protocol 93%
- Evaluating a first fully automated interview grounded in Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) methodology: results from a feasibility study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Stakeholders’ views on an institutional dashboard with metrics for responsible research 94%
- Artificial Intelligence for Contextual Well-being: Protocol for an Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Study with Medical Students as a Social Microcosm 93%
- Knowledge mobilisation of rapid evidence reviews to inform health and social care policy and practice in a public health emergency: appraisal of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre processes and impact, 2021-23 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Connecting Artificial Intelligence and Primary Care Challenges: Findings from a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative Consultation 95%
- Cracking the Code: A Scoping Review to Unite Disciplines in Tackling Legal Issues in Health Artificial Intelligence 93%
- Measures of socioeconomic advantage are not independent predictors of support for healthcare AI: subgroup analysis of a national Australian survey 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- How does policy modelling work in practice? A global analysis on the use of epidemiological modelling in health crises 92%
- Subnational tailoring of malaria interventions for strategic planning and prioritization: experience and perspectives of five malaria programs 92%
- Factors affecting trust in clinical trials conduct: Views of stakeholders from a qualitative study in Ghana 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.