IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Bohdana Doskaliuk, Olena Zimba, Marlen Yessirkepov, Iryna Klishch, Roman Yatsyshyn
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review: Enhancing Efficiency While Preserving Integrity.","authors":"Bohdana Doskaliuk, Olena Zimba, Marlen Yessirkepov, Iryna Klishch, Roman Yatsyshyn","doi":"10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e92","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed various aspects of scientific research, including academic publishing and peer review. In recent years, AI tools such as large language models have demonstrated their capability to streamline numerous tasks traditionally handled by human editors and reviewers. These applications range from automated language and grammar checks to plagiarism detection, format compliance, and even preliminary assessment of research significance. While AI substantially benefits the efficiency and accuracy of academic processes, its integration raises critical ethical and methodological questions, particularly in peer review. AI lacks the subtle understanding of complex scientific content that human expertise provides, posing challenges in evaluating research novelty and significance. Additionally, there are risks associated with over-reliance on AI, potential biases in AI algorithms, and ethical concerns related to transparency, accountability, and data privacy. This review evaluates the perspectives within the scientific community on integrating AI in peer review and academic publishing. By exploring both AI's potential benefits and limitations, we aim to offer practical recommendations that ensure AI is used as a supportive tool, supporting but not replacing human expertise. Such guidelines are essential for preserving the integrity and quality of academic work while benefiting from AI's efficiencies in editorial processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":16249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Korean Medical Science","volume":"40 7","pages":"e92"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11858604/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Korean Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e92","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

摘要

人工智能(AI)的飞速发展改变了科学研究的各个方面,包括学术出版和同行评审。近年来,大型语言模型等人工智能工具已经证明,它们有能力简化传统上由人类编辑和审稿人处理的众多任务。这些应用范围广泛,从自动语言和语法检查到抄袭检测、格式合规,甚至是研究意义的初步评估。虽然人工智能大大提高了学术流程的效率和准确性,但其整合也带来了关键的伦理和方法问题,尤其是在同行评审方面。人工智能对复杂的科学内容缺乏人类专业知识所能提供的微妙理解,这给评估研究的新颖性和重要性带来了挑战。此外,过度依赖人工智能、人工智能算法中的潜在偏见以及与透明度、问责制和数据隐私相关的伦理问题都会带来风险。本综述评估了科学界对将人工智能纳入同行评审和学术出版的看法。通过探讨人工智能的潜在优势和局限性,我们旨在提出切实可行的建议,确保人工智能被用作辅助工具,支持而非取代人类的专业知识。这样的指导方针对于保持学术工作的完整性和质量,同时受益于人工智能在编辑过程中的高效率至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review: Enhancing Efficiency While Preserving Integrity.

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed various aspects of scientific research, including academic publishing and peer review. In recent years, AI tools such as large language models have demonstrated their capability to streamline numerous tasks traditionally handled by human editors and reviewers. These applications range from automated language and grammar checks to plagiarism detection, format compliance, and even preliminary assessment of research significance. While AI substantially benefits the efficiency and accuracy of academic processes, its integration raises critical ethical and methodological questions, particularly in peer review. AI lacks the subtle understanding of complex scientific content that human expertise provides, posing challenges in evaluating research novelty and significance. Additionally, there are risks associated with over-reliance on AI, potential biases in AI algorithms, and ethical concerns related to transparency, accountability, and data privacy. This review evaluates the perspectives within the scientific community on integrating AI in peer review and academic publishing. By exploring both AI's potential benefits and limitations, we aim to offer practical recommendations that ensure AI is used as a supportive tool, supporting but not replacing human expertise. Such guidelines are essential for preserving the integrity and quality of academic work while benefiting from AI's efficiencies in editorial processes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信