The Need for Prospective Integrity Standards for the Use of Generative AI in Research.

IF 1.6 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Kayte Spector-Bagdady
{"title":"The Need for Prospective Integrity Standards for the Use of Generative AI in Research.","authors":"Kayte Spector-Bagdady","doi":"10.1017/jme.2025.41","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The federal government has a long history of trying to find the right balance in supporting scientific and medical research while protecting the public and other researchers from potential harms. To date, this balance has been generally calibrated differently across contexts - including in clinical care, human subjects research, and research integrity. New challenges continue to face this disparate model of regulation, including novel Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools. Because of potential increases in unintentional fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism using GenAI - and challenges establishing both these errors and intentionality in retrospect - this article argues that we should instead move toward a system that sets accepted community standards for the use of GenAI in research as prospective requirements.</p>","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2025.41","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The federal government has a long history of trying to find the right balance in supporting scientific and medical research while protecting the public and other researchers from potential harms. To date, this balance has been generally calibrated differently across contexts - including in clinical care, human subjects research, and research integrity. New challenges continue to face this disparate model of regulation, including novel Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools. Because of potential increases in unintentional fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism using GenAI - and challenges establishing both these errors and intentionality in retrospect - this article argues that we should instead move toward a system that sets accepted community standards for the use of GenAI in research as prospective requirements.

在研究中使用生成式人工智能需要前瞻性完整性标准。
长期以来,联邦政府一直试图在支持科学和医学研究与保护公众和其他研究人员免受潜在危害之间找到适当的平衡。迄今为止,这种平衡通常在不同的背景下进行不同的校准,包括临床护理、人类受试者研究和研究完整性。这种不同的监管模式继续面临新的挑战,包括新的生成式人工智能(GenAI)工具。由于使用GenAI的无意捏造、伪造和剽窃的潜在增加——以及在回顾中确立这些错误和故意性的挑战——本文认为,我们应该转而建立一个系统,为GenAI在研究中的使用设定公认的社区标准,作为未来的要求。
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
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Material published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics (JLME) contributes to the educational mission of The American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, covering public health, health disparities, patient safety and quality of care, and biomedical science and research. It provides articles on such timely topics as health care quality and access, managed care, pain relief, genetics, child/maternal health, reproductive health, informed consent, assisted dying, ethics committees, HIV/AIDS, and public health. Symposium issues review significant policy developments, health law court decisions, and books.
×
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