ReviewThe Journal of surgical research2025
Generative Artificial Intelligence in Academic Surgery: Ethical Implications and Transformative Potential.
Review in The Journal of surgical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Applications of artificial intelligence in early childhood health management: a systematic review from fetal to pediatric periods.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- The Use of Ambient Dictation Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Spaces in Surgery: A Scoping Review.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026Review
- Educational impact and cost efficiency of AI-enhanced videos in pediatric surgery training: a quasi-experimental study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Generative AI in perioperative medicine and anesthesiology: ethical integration, educational innovation, and the future of clinical professionalism.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence and robotic technologies redefining precision and personalization in orthopedic surgery: a narrative review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Evaluation framework for assessing the quality and safety of artificial intelligence solutions for the acute care surgeon: a narrative review from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma quality, safety, and outcomes committee.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedic Surgery: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.MedComm · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly being used in medicine due to its advanced capabilities in image and video recognition, clinical decision support, surgical education, and administrative task automation. Large language models such as OpenAI's Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT)-4 and Google's Bard have particularly revolutionized text generation, offering substantial benefits for the academic surgeon, including aiding in manuscript and grant writing. However, integrating AI into academic surgery necessitates addressing ethical concerns such as bias, transparency, and intellectual property. This paper provides guidelines and recommendations based on current literature around the opportunities and ethical challenges of AI in academic surgery. We discuss the underlying mechanisms of large language models, their potential biases, and the importance of responsible usage. Furthermore, we explore the ethical implications of AI in clinical documentation, highlighting improved efficiency and necessary privacy concerns. This review also addresses the critical issue of intellectual property dilemmas posed by AI-generated innovations in university settings. Finally, we propose guidelines for the responsible adoption of AI in academic and clinical environments, stressing the need for transparency, ethical training, and robust governance frameworks to ensure AI enhances, rather than undermines, academic integrity and patient care.
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.