A Review of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Journals' Guidelines Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Manuscript Writing

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the submission guidelines of physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) journals regarding their policies on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in manuscript preparation.

Design

Cross-sectional study, including 54 MEDLINE-indexed PM&R journals, selected by searching “Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine” as a broad subject term for indexed journals. Non-English journals, conference-related journals, and those not primarily focused on PM&R were excluded.

Setting

PM&R journals.

Participants

Not applicable.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Reviewing policies regarding the use of AI and comparing CiteScore, Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP), Scientific Journal Ranking (SJR), and Impact Factor (IF) between journals with an AI policy and those without.

Results

Of the 54 PM&R journals, only 46.3% had an AI policy. Among these, none completely banned AI use or allowed unlimited use without a declaration. Most journals (52%) permitted AI for manuscript editing with a required declaration, 44% allowed unlimited AI use with a declaration, and only 4% allowed AI-assisted editing without any declaration. No significant difference was found in scientometric scores between journals considered with and without AI policies (P>.05).

Conclusions

Under half of MEDLINE-indexed PM&R journals had guidelines regarding the use of AI. None of the journals with AI policies entirely prohibited its use, nor did they allow unrestricted use without a declaration. Journals with defined AI policies did not demonstrate higher citation rates or affect scores.