ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
Evolution of artificial intelligence writing tools in domain of scientific writing: A threat to human writing and its ethical considerations.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI in academic writing: Transparency and ethics.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Article
- Responsibility and transparency of artificial intelligence use in scientific writing: Is unfavorable use already invading?Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The convergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and scientific writing represents a transformative intersection in research and education, with each field reciprocally reforming and refining the other. AI, with its adaptable learning strategies and innovative technologies, enhances the area of scientific writing. However, transparency and recognition of AI's role in text generation are crucial to upholding accountability among human authors for the final outcome. As AI technologies rapidly advance, especially in the realm of scientific writing, it becomes increasingly important to openly acknowledge the contribution of AI systems. It is highly recommended that human language generating AI-powered tools should necessarily implement licensing and strict regulations. In this way, its access would be limited to those who use these tools as aids in research, rather than exploiting and misusing it to generate whole manuscripts, hindering the effective learning of students and academic researchers.
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.