I found this talk by Clare Sudbery on what continuous integration (CI) was intended to mean illuminating. In short, trunk based development, frequent commits, and all hands on deck when the tests aren't green. Her arguments are compelling, as are her critiques of PRs and the working environment they can engender. Unfortunately, it is not a practical methodology to use with legacy products that exhibit inconsistent architecture, poorly implemented, with spotty test coverage. Perhaps use feature branch development to address each of these failings so that you can have true CI in the future.
Is it a future I would enjoy? I don't think so. I can't help but think that trunk based development will further speed the assembly line that agile, esp Scrum, has already placed us all on.
Continuous Integration: That’s Not What They Meant • Clare Sudbery • GOTO 2023
ps I listen to this stuff on drives. Good talks generally don't need slides.