The Presence and Nature of AI-Use Disclosure Statements in Medical Education Journals: A Bibliometric Study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Perspectives on Medical Education Pub Date : 2026-03-05 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.5334/pme.2431
Muhammad Ans, Lauren A Maggio, Hamzah Algodi, Joe A Costello, Erik Driessen, Kevin Oswald, Lorelei Lingard
{"title":"The Presence and Nature of AI-Use Disclosure Statements in Medical Education Journals: A Bibliometric Study.","authors":"Muhammad Ans, Lauren A Maggio, Hamzah Algodi, Joe A Costello, Erik Driessen, Kevin Oswald, Lorelei Lingard","doi":"10.5334/pme.2431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As AI use becomes more common in research, disclosure policies have emerged to ensure transparency and appropriateness. However, database research in other fields suggests that disclosure may lag behind AI use. Medical education journal editors report that submitted manuscripts rarely include AI-use disclosures, and they perceive a lack of clarity regarding when and how AI use should be disclosed. However, we lack objective evidence regarding the incidence and nature of AI-use disclosure in medical education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using bibliometric methods, we searched a database of 24 leading medical education journals for articles published between January and July 2025 (n = 2,762 articles). Screening with <i>Covidence</i> software excluded 716 non-empirical and/or non-English language articles. The remainder (n = 2,046) were examined for the presence of AI-use disclosures, which were content-analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2.5% of empirical articles (n = 51) had an AI disclosure statement. <i>BMC Medical Education</i> contained the most disclosures (24), followed by <i>Medical Teacher</i> (7) and <i>Journal of Surgical Education</i> (4). Forty-two articles were authored in non-native English-speaking countries, and 69.4% of all first authors had begun publishing in the past decade. Disclosures averaged 43 words and described use superficially: most commonly \"editing\" and \"translation\". Of 18 named tools, ChatGPT was most common. Most disclosures explicitly attested to author responsibility for AI-produced material. Disclosures usually appeared in acknowledgements; those located in methods lacked responsibility attestation. Negative disclosures attesting that AI was not used were also present.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>AI-use disclosures in medical education journals are rare and appear mostly in work from non-native English-speaking regions of the world. A shared disclosure practice is evident: name the tool and affirm author responsibility, but describe use superficially. This suggests a practice of \"safe\" disclosure that may be more performative than informative, therefore failing to satisfy the goal of ensuring transparent and ethical AI use in research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48532,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Medical Education","volume":"15 1","pages":"212-225"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12962250/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.2431","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As AI use becomes more common in research, disclosure policies have emerged to ensure transparency and appropriateness. However, database research in other fields suggests that disclosure may lag behind AI use. Medical education journal editors report that submitted manuscripts rarely include AI-use disclosures, and they perceive a lack of clarity regarding when and how AI use should be disclosed. However, we lack objective evidence regarding the incidence and nature of AI-use disclosure in medical education.

Methods: Using bibliometric methods, we searched a database of 24 leading medical education journals for articles published between January and July 2025 (n = 2,762 articles). Screening with Covidence software excluded 716 non-empirical and/or non-English language articles. The remainder (n = 2,046) were examined for the presence of AI-use disclosures, which were content-analyzed.

Results: 2.5% of empirical articles (n = 51) had an AI disclosure statement. BMC Medical Education contained the most disclosures (24), followed by Medical Teacher (7) and Journal of Surgical Education (4). Forty-two articles were authored in non-native English-speaking countries, and 69.4% of all first authors had begun publishing in the past decade. Disclosures averaged 43 words and described use superficially: most commonly "editing" and "translation". Of 18 named tools, ChatGPT was most common. Most disclosures explicitly attested to author responsibility for AI-produced material. Disclosures usually appeared in acknowledgements; those located in methods lacked responsibility attestation. Negative disclosures attesting that AI was not used were also present.

Discussion: AI-use disclosures in medical education journals are rare and appear mostly in work from non-native English-speaking regions of the world. A shared disclosure practice is evident: name the tool and affirm author responsibility, but describe use superficially. This suggests a practice of "safe" disclosure that may be more performative than informative, therefore failing to satisfy the goal of ensuring transparent and ethical AI use in research.

Abstract Image

医学教育期刊中人工智能使用披露声明的存在和性质:文献计量学研究。
背景:随着人工智能在研究中的使用越来越普遍,为了确保透明度和适当性,已经出现了披露政策。然而,其他领域的数据库研究表明,信息披露可能落后于人工智能的使用。医学教育期刊编辑报告说,提交的手稿很少包括人工智能使用的披露,他们认为在何时以及如何披露人工智能使用方面缺乏明确性。然而,我们缺乏关于医学教育中人工智能使用披露的发生率和性质的客观证据。方法:采用文献计量学方法,检索2025年1月至7月间发表的24种主要医学教育期刊数据库(n = 2762篇)。用covid - 19软件筛查排除了716篇非经验性和/或非英语文章。其余的(n = 2046)被检查是否存在人工智能使用披露,并对其进行内容分析。结果:2.5%的实证文章(n = 51)有AI披露声明。BMC医学教育披露最多(24),其次是医学教师(7)和外科教育杂志(4)。42篇论文的作者是非英语国家的,69.4%的第一作者是在过去十年开始发表论文的。披露信息平均43个单词,并对其使用进行了肤浅的描述:最常见的是“编辑”和“翻译”。在18个已命名的工具中,ChatGPT是最常见的。大多数披露都明确证明作者对人工智能制作的材料负有责任。信息披露通常出现在致谢中;方法中缺少责任证明。证明没有使用人工智能的负面披露也存在。讨论:医学教育期刊很少披露人工智能的使用情况,主要出现在世界上非英语母语地区的工作中。共享的披露实践是显而易见的:命名工具并确认作者的责任,但肤浅地描述使用情况。这表明,一种“安全”披露的做法可能更多地是表现性的,而不是信息性的,因此无法满足确保在研究中透明和道德地使用人工智能的目标。
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
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
31
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Perspectives on Medical Education mission is support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Official journal of the The Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO). Perspectives on Medical Education is a non-profit Open Access journal with no charges for authors to submit or publish an article, and the full text of all articles is freely available immediately upon publication, thanks to the sponsorship of The Netherlands Association for Medical Education. Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary. The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members. The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief. Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission. Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary. The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members. The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief. Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书