Artificial Intelligence in Medical Writing: Addressing Untouched Threats.

IF 1.5 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
JMA journal Pub Date : 2025-01-15 Epub Date: 2024-12-06 DOI:10.31662/jmaj.2024-0268
Shigeki Matsubara
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Medical Writing: Addressing Untouched Threats.","authors":"Shigeki Matsubara","doi":"10.31662/jmaj.2024-0268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The advantages and disadvantages of the use of generative artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT, in medical writing have been widely discussed; however, two concerns remain largely unexplored. The first involves \"human touch,\" such as personal anecdotes and experiences. This touch often distinguishes human-written papers from those generated by ChatGPT as ChatGPT cannot independently access personal experiences. Although ChatGPT may mimic humanlike behavior, including the incorporation of a human touch, it lacks genuine emotions. With the lack of established guidelines on the acceptable levels of ChatGPT use and imperfect detection tools, many authors fear that their work could be perceived as overly reliant on ChatGPT. I worry that writers may artificially insert forced personal touches simply to assert their own writing. The second concern is the authors' worry and doubt about whether to use ChatGPT and, if so, to what extent, which may disrupt their reflective and quiet writing process. While I acknowledge the lack of empirical data, I offer practical suggestions to balance the benefits of ChatGPT assistance and the preservation of the integrity of human writing in medical publications.</p>","PeriodicalId":73550,"journal":{"name":"JMA journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"273-275"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11799728/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMA journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31662/jmaj.2024-0268","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The advantages and disadvantages of the use of generative artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT, in medical writing have been widely discussed; however, two concerns remain largely unexplored. The first involves "human touch," such as personal anecdotes and experiences. This touch often distinguishes human-written papers from those generated by ChatGPT as ChatGPT cannot independently access personal experiences. Although ChatGPT may mimic humanlike behavior, including the incorporation of a human touch, it lacks genuine emotions. With the lack of established guidelines on the acceptable levels of ChatGPT use and imperfect detection tools, many authors fear that their work could be perceived as overly reliant on ChatGPT. I worry that writers may artificially insert forced personal touches simply to assert their own writing. The second concern is the authors' worry and doubt about whether to use ChatGPT and, if so, to what extent, which may disrupt their reflective and quiet writing process. While I acknowledge the lack of empirical data, I offer practical suggestions to balance the benefits of ChatGPT assistance and the preservation of the integrity of human writing in medical publications.

医学写作中的人工智能:解决未触及的威胁。
在医学写作中使用生成式人工智能(如ChatGPT)的优点和缺点已被广泛讨论;然而,有两个问题在很大程度上仍未得到解决。第一种是“人情味”,比如个人轶事和经历。由于ChatGPT不能独立地访问个人经验,因此这种接触通常将人工撰写的论文与ChatGPT生成的论文区分开来。虽然ChatGPT可以模仿人类的行为,包括人类触摸的结合,但它缺乏真正的情感。由于缺乏关于ChatGPT可接受的使用水平和不完善的检测工具的既定指导方针,许多作者担心他们的工作可能被认为过度依赖ChatGPT。我担心作家可能会人为地插入强迫的个人风格,只是为了维护自己的写作。第二个问题是作者对是否使用ChatGPT的担忧和怀疑,如果使用,到什么程度,这可能会破坏他们反思和安静的写作过程。虽然我承认缺乏经验数据,但我提供了实际的建议,以平衡ChatGPT援助的好处和维护医学出版物中人类写作的完整性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信