Document Type
Article
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) increasingly impacts research and scholarly communication. Given the evolving application of ChatGPT and other AI tools in scholarly communications, health sciences librarians must become cognizant of any existing journal publishing guidelines for AI-created or assisted manuscripts. The study aims to examine how scholarly biomedical and health sciences journals and publishers respond to submissions of these manuscripts and what requirements or policies have been put in place to guide and instruct authors on AI use.
Methods: We first retrieved and consolidated a list of journals representing disciplines in biomedical and health sciences from four sources: Scopus, Journal Citation Report (JCR), Google Scholar (GS), and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). To consolidate and finalize journal titles for the study, we selected all journal titles overlapped among Scopus, JCR, and Google Scholar (GS) and retained several journals unique to Google Scholar. From DOAJ, the top 50 journals were included, given the wide acceptance of open access (OA) journal publication in the current academic climate and the increasing influence of OA journals in the scholarly publishing arena. We then reviewed the selected journals’ instructions for authors or submission guidelines available online to identify any specific policies, requirements, procedures, and terms related to AI-generated or assisted content. We created and piloted a standard data charting form, including data elements on AI statements, the permission of AI in manuscript writing, restrictions on AI authorship and citation, and requirements for disclosure or acknowledgment of AI use in manuscripts. Two authors, independently and in duplicate, charted data elements to be analyzed and synthesized in a duo process for any trends and emerging patterns of requirements regarding the use of AI in journal article submissions.
Results: A consolidated list of 25 journals was selected for the review from the top 50 journals in medicine ranked by CiteScore from Scopus, the top 50 journals sorted by Journal Impact Factor (JIF) from JCR, mainly in the categories of clinical medicine, biology and biochemistry, the top 20 journal titles in health and medical sciences in GS, and the top 50 journals in medicine from DOAJ. Of the 25 selected journals, 22 had AI statements either created on their own (n=14) or adapted from other organizations (n=8). The AI statements or guidelines identified varied. There were no standards or guidelines for AI use by authors in scholarly publishing. No AI use guidelines were found in 3 journals.
Conclusions: Varying applications of AI chatbots have emerged in different fields, including scholarly communications. Given the uncertainty about the impact of AI and the need for guiding principles in scholarly communications involving AI use, health sciences librarians must keep pace with emerging AL requirements of academic journals. The results shared and presented shed light on these requirements and will be helpful to health sciences librarians as they guide, support, and teach researchers and writers about the judicious use of AI and any ethical ramifications of its application in their scholarly activities.
Disciplines
Artificial Intelligence and Robotics | Library and Information Science | Scholarly Communication
Recommended Citation
Mi, Misa; Wu, Lin; Zhang, Yingting; and Wu, Wendy, "How Do Selected Biomedical and Health Sciences Journals React to Submissions of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Assisted Manuscripts?" (2025). Library Scholarly Publications. 185.
https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/libsp/185
APPENDIX 1. List of 25 Journal Titles
Appendix2.docx (10 kB)
APPENDIX 2. Table of Journal Names and AI Policies