Artificial Intelligence Tools for Teaching, Writing & Research

Many academics, journals and publishers are thinking about how the issue of AI use in scholarly writing and publishing. This is an evolving topic but there are certain places you can look for guidance in this area.

In general, AI policies focus on four main areas of AI usage:

1. AI as an author
2. Using AI for content generation
3. Using AI for image generation
4. AI in peer review

If you know what journal you want to submit to, check the journal policies to see if they mention AI. Journals will usually list their AI policies under a Policies section or Information for Authors. 

If you do not see an AI policy for the journal, you can check to see if there is a publisher policy. Below are an example of a journal policy and a publisher policy.

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) has guidelines on AI through their recommendations.

Below are some highlights from the ICJME guidelines:

• AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author
• Using AI for writing assistance should be reported in the acknowledgment section
• Journals should require authors to disclose if and how they used AI in the production of their submitted work
• Peer-reviewers must request permission from the journal prior to using AI technology in their review process
• Authors should describe how they used AI technology in their methods section
• AI should never be cited as a primary source of information

The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) has recommendations on Chatbots, Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publications

WAME Recommendation 1: Chatbots cannot be authors.

WAME Recommendation 2: Authors should be transparent when chatbots are used and provide information about how they were used. 

• WAME Recommendations 2.1: Authors submitting a paper in which a chatbot/AI was used to draft new text should note such use in the acknowledgment; all prompts used to generate new text, or to convert text or text prompts into tables or illustrations, should be specified.

• WAME Recommendation 2.2: When an AI tool such as a chatbot is used to carry out or generate analytical work, help report results (e.g., generating tables or figures), or write computer codes, this should be stated in the body of the paper, in both the Abstract and the Methods section. In the interests of enabling scientific scrutiny, including replication and identifying falsification, the full prompt used to generate the research results, the time and date of query, and the AI tool used and its version, should be provided.

WAME Recommendation 3: Authors are responsible for material provided by a chatbot in their paper (including the accuracy of what is presented and the absence of plagiarism) and for appropriate attribution of all sources (including original sources for material generated by the chatbot). 

WAME Recommendation 4: Editors and peer reviewers should specify, to authors and each other, any use of chatbots in the evaluation of the manuscript and generation of reviews and correspondence. If they use chatbots in their communications with authors and each other, they should explain how they were used.

WAME Recommendation 5: Editors need appropriate tools to help them detect content generated or altered by AI. Such tools should be made available to editors regardless of ability to pay for them, for the good of science and the public, and to help ensure the integrity of healthcare information and reducing the risk of adverse health outcomes.