Use of Generative AI

Policy on the Use of Generative AI in Academic Publishing

1. Scope and Purpose

This policy outlines the ethical use, disclosure, and oversight of Generative AI (GenAI) in the submission, peer review, and editorial processes of this journal. It aligns with the principles and best practices established by leading organizations in academic publishing, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).

2. Definition

Generative AI refers to artificial intelligence technologies capable of producing text, images, or other content in response to user inputs. Tools such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, and similar models fall under this category.

3. Principles and Standards

3.1. Ethical Use (COPE Guidelines)

Authors, reviewers, and editors must adhere to
GenAI may assist in minor aspects of the publishing process (e.g., language editing) but must not replace human intellectual contributions or create fabricated content.

3.2. Transparency (ICMJE and DOAJ)

Authors are required to disclose the use of GenAI in their manuscripts. Disclosure must explicitly state which tools were used and for what purposes.
Journals indexed in the DOAJ must provide clear editorial policies on the use of AI tools to maintain openness and reproducibility.

3.3. Authorship and Accountability (ICMJE)

GenAI tools cannot be credited as authors, as they do not meet ICMJE’s authorship criteria: substantial intellectual contribution, drafting or revising the work, and accountability for content.
Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and ethical compliance of their submissions, even if AI tools were used.

3.4. Peer Review Integrity (WAME and OASPA)

Peer reviewers using GenAI tools must disclose such use to the editorial board.
AI tools may provide suggestions or summaries but cannot replace critical analysis or professional judgment required for peer review.

4. Acceptable Uses of Generative AI

Language Refinement: Authors may use GenAI for grammar correction, syntax improvements, or stylistic edits.
Data Representation: AI-generated charts or images are acceptable if the data source is clearly cited and visualizations are verified.
Idea Generation: AI tools can assist in brainstorming or exploring research frameworks but should not contribute original hypotheses or conclusions.

5. Prohibited Uses of Generative AI

Fabrication or Manipulation: AI must not be used to generate false data, references, or conclusions.
Plagiarism: Using AI-generated content without proper attribution is a violation of ethical publishing standards.
Misrepresentation: Authors must not misrepresent AI-generated work as their own intellectual contribution.

6. Disclosure Requirements (Aligned with COPE and ICMJE)

All authors must provide a clear disclosure statement regarding the use of GenAI. The statement should include:

The name(s) of the tool(s) used.

Specific tasks where the tool was applied (e.g., language editing, visualization).

Example Disclosure Statement: "Generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, were used for language editing and improving the clarity of the manuscript. All intellectual content, research design, and data analysis were conducted solely by the authors."

7. Editorial Oversight (WAME and OASPA)

Editors will evaluate disclosed AI use during the review process to ensure it complies with this policy.
Manuscripts suspected of undisclosed AI-generated content may undergo further scrutiny, including plagiarism detection tools or re-submission requests.

8. Consequences of Misuse

In alignment with COPE’s misconduct policies, violations of this policy may result in:

Rejection of the manuscript.
Retraction of published articles if ethical breaches are discovered post-publication.
Notification to institutions, funders, or other stakeholders, where appropriate.