Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Blurred Thresholds of AI-Use Disclosure: Health Professions Education Journal Editors’ Expectations of Necessity and Sufficiency Cover

The Blurred Thresholds of AI-Use Disclosure: Health Professions Education Journal Editors’ Expectations of Necessity and Sufficiency

Perspectives on Medical Education
Volume 14 (2025): Issue 1
By: Lorelei Lingard,  Erik Driessen and  Kevin Oswald  
Open Access
|Dec 2025

References

  1. 1Huang J, Tan M. The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: writing better scientific review articles. Am J Cancer Res. 2023; Apr 15;13(4):1148–1154.
    Back to article
  2. 2van Dis EAM, Bollen J, Zuidema W, van Rooij R, Bockting CL. ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature. 2023;614, 224–226. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-023-00288-7
    Back to article
  3. 3Lingard L. Writing with ChatGPT: An Illustration of its Capacity, Limitations & Implications for Academic Writers. Perspect Med Educ. 2023;Jun 29;12(1):261–270. DOI: 10.5334/pme.1072
    Back to article
  4. 4Ganjavi C, Eppler MB, Pekcan A, Biedermann B, Abreu A, Collins GS, et al. Publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis. BMJ. 2024;384:e077192. DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-077192
    Back to article
  5. 5Resnik DB, Hosseini M. Disclosing artificial intelligence use in scientific research and publication: When should disclosure be mandatory, optional, or unnecessary? Account Res. 2025; DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2481949
    Back to article
  6. 6Baron NS. Who wrote this?: how AI and the lure of efficiency threaten human writing. Stanford University Press, 2023. DOI: 10.1515/9781503637900
    Back to article
  7. 7Dwivedi YK, Kshetri N, Hughes L, Slade EL, Jeyaraj A, et al. So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. Int J Inf Manage. 2023;71:102642, ISSN 0268-4012. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
    Back to article
  8. 8Holden Thorp H. ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science. 2023;379:313–313. DOI: 10.1126/science.adg7879
    Back to article
  9. 9Kwon D. Is it OK for AI to write science papers? Nature survey shows researchers are split. Nature. 2025;641:574–578. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-025-01463-8
    Back to article
  10. 10Andrew G. “ChatGPT” contamination”: estimating the prevalence of LLMs in the scholarly literature.” arXiv preprint 2024; arXiv:2403.16887.
    Back to article
  11. 11Desaire H, Isom M, Hua D. Almost Nobody Is Using ChatGPT to Write Academic Science Papers (Yet). Big Data and Cogn Comput. 2024;8(10):133. DOI: 10.3390/bdcc8100133
    Back to article
  12. 12Lingard L, Chandritilake M, de Heer M, Klasen J, Maulina F, Olmos-Vega F, St-Onge C. Will ChatGPT’s free language editing service level the playing field in science communication?: Insights from a collaborative project with non-native English scholars. Perspect Medl Educ. 2023;12(1):565–574. DOI: 10.5334/pme.1246
    Back to article
  13. 13Torabi SJ, Warn MJ, Bitner BF, Haidar YM, Tjoa T, Kuan EC. Variability of Guidelines and Disclosures for AI-Generated Content in Top Surgical Journals. Surg Innovation. 2024;31(4):389–391. DOI: 10.1177/15533506241259916
    Back to article
  14. 14Kwon D. Science sleuths flag hundreds of papers that use AI without disclosing it. Nature. 2025;641:290–291. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-025-01180-2
    Back to article
  15. 15Glynn A. Suspected Undeclared Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Academic Literature: An Analysis of the Academ-AI Dataset. arXiv preprint 2024; arXiv.2411.15218.
    Back to article
  16. 16COPE. Authorship and AI tools: COPE Position Statement: COPE; 2023 [updated 13 Feb 2023]. https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author#:~:text=COPE%20position%20statement&text=COPE%20joins%20organisations%2C%20such%20as,responsibility%20for%20the%20submitted%20work.
    Back to article
  17. 17DeVilbiss MB, Roberts LW. Artificial Intelligence Tools in Scholarly Publishing: Guidance for Acad Med Authors. Acad Med. 2023. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005261
    Back to article
  18. 18Stanbrook MB, Weinhold M, Kelsall D. A new policy on the use of artificial intelligence tools for manuscripts submitted to CMAJ 2023;195(28):E958–E959. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.230949
    Back to article
  19. 19Ganjavi C, Eppler MB, Pekcan A, Biedermann B, Abreu A, Collins GS, et al. Publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis. BMJ. 2024;384:e077192. DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-077192
    Back to article
  20. 20Perkins M, Roe J. Academic publisher guidelines on AI usage: A ChatGPT supported thematic analysis. F1000Res. 2024;Jan 16;12:1398. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.142411.2
    Back to article
  21. 21Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Updated May 2023. https://www.icmje.org/news-and-editorials/updated_recommendations_may2023.html
    Back to article
  22. 22Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Updated January 2024. https://www.icmje.org/news-and-editorials/updated_recommendations_jan2024.html
    Back to article
  23. 23Flanagin A, Bibbins-Domingo K, Berkwits M, Christiansen SL. Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge. JAMA. 2023;329(8):637–639. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.1344
    Back to article
  24. 24Flanagin A, Pirracchio R, Khera R, Berkwits M, Hswen Y, Bibbins-Domingo K. Reporting Use of AI in Research and Scholarly Publication. Network Guidance. JAMA. 2024;331(13):1096–1098. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2024.3471
    Back to article
  25. 25Medical Education, Guidelines for Authors: AI Policy. Accessed December 4, 2025. https://asmepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/13652923/homepage/author-guidelines
    Back to article
  26. 26Academic Medicine, Guidelines for Authors: Use of AI Tools in Submissions. Accessed December 4, 2025. https://asmepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/journal/13652923/homepage/author-guidelines
    Back to article
  27. 27Ubiquity Press. “Guidelines for Authors.” https://ubiquitypress.com/ai-policy Accessed online Nov 21, 2025.
    Back to article
  28. 28Kwon D. Scientists split on ethics of AI use. Nature 2025;641:574–578. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-025-01463-8
    Back to article
  29. 29Chemaya N, Martin D. Perceptions and detection of AI use in manuscript preparation for academic journals. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(7):e0304807. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304807
    Back to article
  30. 30Hosseini M, Gordijn B, Kaebnick GE, Holmes K. Disclosing generative AI use for writing assistance should be voluntary. Res Ethics; 2025. DOI: 10.1177/17470161251345499
    Back to article
  31. 31He J, Houde S, Weisz JD. Which Contributions Deserve Credit? Perceptions of Attribution in Human-AI Co-Creation. arXiv preprint 2025; arXiv:2502.18357.
    Back to article
  32. 32Aczel B, Wagenmakers E. Transparency Guidance for ChatGPT Usage in Scientific Writing. PsyArXiv 2023, Preprint. Accessed online Feb 15, 2024. https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/b58ex_v1
    Back to article
  33. 33Hadan H, Wang DM, Mogavi RH, Tu J, Zhang-Kennedy L, Nacke LE. The great AI witch hunt: Reviewers’ perception and (Mis)conception of generative AI in research writing. Comput Hum Behav Artif Hum. 2024;2(2):100095. DOI: 10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100095
    Back to article
  34. 34Thorne S. Interpretive description. Routledge International Handbook of Qualitative Nursing Research. Routledge. 2013;325–336. DOI: 10.4324/9780203409527-34
    Back to article
  35. 35O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook, DA. Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research: A Synthesis of Recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245–1251. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388
    Back to article
  36. 36Maggio LA, Ninkov A, Frank JR, Costello JA, Artino AR Jr.. Delineating the field of medical education: Bibliometric research approach (es). Med Educ. 2022;56(4):387–394. DOI: 10.1111/medu.14677
    Back to article
  37. 37Braun V, Clarke V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2021;13(2):201–216. DOI: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846
    Back to article
  38. 38Malterud K, Siersma VD, Guassora AD. Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power. Qual Health Res. 2016;26(13):1753–1760. DOI: 10.1177/1049732315617444
    Back to article
  39. 39Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage; 2022. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-69909-7_3470-2
    Back to article
  40. 40Virginia B, Victoria C. Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. Int J Transgend Health 2023;24(1):1–6. DOI: 10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597
    Back to article
  41. 41Lincoln YS. Naturalistic inquiry. Vol. 75. Sage, 1985.
    Back to article
  42. 42Hosseini M, Resnik DB, Holmes K. The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts. Res Ethics. 2023;19(4):449–465. DOI: 10.1177/17470161231180449
    Back to article
  43. 43Suchikovaa Y, Tsybuliak N. “ChatGPT isn’t an Author, but a Contribution Taxonomy is Needed.” Account Res. 2024;1–6. 10.1080/08989621.2024.2405039
    Back to article
  44. 44The STM Association Task and Finish Group on AI Labelling Terminology for Research Content Declaration. Recommendations for a Classification of AI Use in Academic Manuscript Preparation. April 2025.
    Back to article
  45. 45Weaver KD. The AI Disclosure (AID) Framework. C&RL News. 2024;85(10):407–411. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2408.01904
    Back to article
  46. 46CRediT Taxonomy,” ETFLIN, accessed July 9, 2025, https://etflin.com/information/credit-taxonomy.
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.2326 | Journal eISSN: 2212-277X
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Dec 4, 2025
Accepted on: Dec 9, 2025
Published on: Dec 18, 2025
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2025 Lorelei Lingard, Erik Driessen, Kevin Oswald, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 14 (2025): Issue 1