ReviewJournal of Korean medical science2024
Publication Ethics in the Era of Artificial Intelligence.
Review in Journal of Korean medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Large Language Models in Colorectal Cancer Care and Clinical Decision Support: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- From AI anxiety to educational opportunity: equitable and practical uses of artificial intelligence in STEM education.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Integrity in Radiation Oncology Research: A Systematic Review of Retracted Studies, Retraction Notices, and Their Impact on the Field.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Authorship, Disclosures, and Conflicts of Interest in Papers Related to the Use of Artificial Intelligence.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Review
- The role of large language models in the writing of surgical reviews: fact or fantasy?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- AI detection in Italian essays through different text representations and adversarial robustness evaluation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Editorial: Research ethics and integrity in the artificial intelligence era.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- Scientific Publishing in the era of Artificial Intelligence: Integrity and Responsibility.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2026Article
- Analysis of Retracted Publications on Artificial Intelligence: Trends, Ethical Concerns, and Scientific Integrity.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Analysis of Retracted Publications on Methotrexate.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Turkish medical oncologists' perspectives on integrating artificial intelligence: knowledge, attitudes, and ethical considerations.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Defining the Boundaries of AI Use in Scientific Writing: A Comparative Review of Editorial Policies.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Review
- Perspectives of Artificial Intelligence Use for In-House Ethics Checks of Journal Submissions.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Review
- Review
- Can ChatGPT Boost Students' Employment Confidence? A Pioneering Booster for Career Readiness.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review: Enhancing Efficiency While Preserving Integrity.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Review
- On the ethical and moral dimensions of using artificial intelligence for evidence synthesis.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Editorial Message.Neurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence policies in neurology journals: a cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of new technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), to science affects the way and methodology in which research is conducted. While the responsible use of AI brings many innovations and benefits to science and humanity, its unethical use poses a serious threat to scientific integrity and literature. Even in the absence of malicious use, the Chatbot output itself, as a software application based on AI, carries the risk of containing biases, distortions, irrelevancies, misrepresentations and plagiarism. Therefore, the use of complex AI algorithms raises concerns about bias, transparency and accountability, requiring the development of new ethical rules to protect scientific integrity. Unfortunately, the development and writing of ethical codes cannot keep up with the pace of development and implementation of technology. The main purpose of this narrative review is to inform readers, authors, reviewers and editors about new approaches to publication ethics in the era of AI. It specifically focuses on tips on how to disclose the use of AI in your manuscript, how to avoid publishing entirely AI-generated text, and current standards for retraction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.