Comprehensive Consideration of Ethics in AI-assisted Scientific Writing and Peer Review.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Jin-Hong Yoo
{"title":"Comprehensive Consideration of Ethics in AI-assisted Scientific Writing and Peer Review.","authors":"Jin-Hong Yoo","doi":"10.3346/jkms.2026.41.e281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The emergence of large language models and generative artificial intelligence (AI) is driving fundamental transformations in the ecosystem of scholarly publishing and peer review. As manuscript production enters an era of sophisticated technological assistance, it has become imperative to transition from traditional approaches focused on misconduct prevention toward a more proactive ethical framework. We propose a new standard centered on transparency, accountability, and confidentiality, presenting a clear solution to challenges associated with integrating AI into academic discourse. Regarding authorship, AI cannot be credited as an author; the final accountability for academic integrity lies only with human authors. Transparency is maintained through a tiered disclosure framework that mandates reporting based on the extent of artificial intelligence utilization. In the context of peer review, while the potential of artificial intelligence to optimize efficiency is recognized, its application must be restricted to a closed security system to safeguard against data breaches. Furthermore, this review highlights new risk factors such as algorithmic sycophancy and prompt injection attacks, emphasizing that a final verification through human expertise is essential to ensuring the integrity of the peer review process. In conclusion, we present a comprehensive regulatory revision roadmap integrating the authors' obligations for transparent information disclosures, reviewers' commitment to confidentiality and security, and editors' ethical oversight. This framework does not regard AI as an object of absolute prohibition but rather positions it as an advanced scholarly aid rooted in human intellectual accountability. The perspectives in this <i>Special Issue</i> will provide a practical framework to maintain academic rigor and enhance institutional trust in the era of AI.</p>","PeriodicalId":16249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Korean Medical Science","volume":"41 29","pages":"e281"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13406946/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Korean Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2026.41.e281","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The emergence of large language models and generative artificial intelligence (AI) is driving fundamental transformations in the ecosystem of scholarly publishing and peer review. As manuscript production enters an era of sophisticated technological assistance, it has become imperative to transition from traditional approaches focused on misconduct prevention toward a more proactive ethical framework. We propose a new standard centered on transparency, accountability, and confidentiality, presenting a clear solution to challenges associated with integrating AI into academic discourse. Regarding authorship, AI cannot be credited as an author; the final accountability for academic integrity lies only with human authors. Transparency is maintained through a tiered disclosure framework that mandates reporting based on the extent of artificial intelligence utilization. In the context of peer review, while the potential of artificial intelligence to optimize efficiency is recognized, its application must be restricted to a closed security system to safeguard against data breaches. Furthermore, this review highlights new risk factors such as algorithmic sycophancy and prompt injection attacks, emphasizing that a final verification through human expertise is essential to ensuring the integrity of the peer review process. In conclusion, we present a comprehensive regulatory revision roadmap integrating the authors' obligations for transparent information disclosures, reviewers' commitment to confidentiality and security, and editors' ethical oversight. This framework does not regard AI as an object of absolute prohibition but rather positions it as an advanced scholarly aid rooted in human intellectual accountability. The perspectives in this Special Issue will provide a practical framework to maintain academic rigor and enhance institutional trust in the era of AI.

人工智能辅助科学写作与同行评议中的伦理综合思考
大型语言模型和生成式人工智能(AI)的出现正在推动学术出版和同行评审生态系统的根本性变革。随着手稿制作进入一个复杂的技术援助时代,从传统的预防不当行为的方法向更积极主动的道德框架过渡已经变得势在必行。我们提出了一个以透明度、问责制和保密性为中心的新标准,为将人工智能融入学术话语的挑战提供了一个明确的解决方案。关于作者身份,AI不能被认为是作者;学术诚信的最终责任只在于人类作者。透明度是通过分层披露框架来维持的,该框架要求根据人工智能的使用程度进行报告。在同行评议的背景下,虽然人工智能在优化效率方面的潜力得到了认可,但它的应用必须限制在一个封闭的安全系统中,以防止数据泄露。此外,本综述强调了新的风险因素,如算法谄谀和快速注入攻击,强调通过人类专业知识进行最终验证对于确保同行评审过程的完整性至关重要。总之,我们提出了一个全面的监管修订路线图,整合了作者对透明信息披露的义务、审稿人对保密和安全的承诺以及编辑的道德监督。这个框架并不认为人工智能是绝对禁止的对象,而是将其定位为植根于人类智力责任的高级学术援助。本期特刊的观点将为在人工智能时代保持学术严谨性和增强机构信任提供一个实用的框架。
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 Korean Medical Science
Journal of Korean Medical Science 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.90%
发文量
320
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Korean Medical Science (JKMS) is an international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal of medicine published weekly in English. The Journal’s publisher is the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences (KAMS), Korean Medical Association (KMA). JKMS aims to publish evidence-based, scientific research articles from various disciplines of the medical sciences. The Journal welcomes articles of general interest to medical researchers especially when they contain original information. Articles on the clinical evaluation of drugs and other therapies, epidemiologic studies of the general population, studies on pathogenic organisms and toxic materials, and the toxicities and adverse effects of therapeutics are welcome.
×
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