The importance of transparency: Declaring the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in academic writing

被引:26
作者
Tang, Arthur [1 ]
Li, Kin-Kit [2 ]
Kwok, Kin On [3 ,4 ,5 ,6 ]
Cao, Liujiao [7 ]
Luong, Stanley [1 ]
Tam, Wilson [8 ]
机构
[1] RMIT Univ, Sch Sci Engn & Technol, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
[2] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Social & Behav Sci, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[3] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, JC Sch Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Stanley Ho Ctr Emerging Infect Dis, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[5] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Hong Kong Inst Asia Pacific Studies, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[6] Imperial Coll London, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Infect Dis Epidemiol, London, England
[7] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp, West China Sch Nursing, Chengdu, Peoples R China
[8] Natl Univ Singapore, Alice Lee Ctr Nursing Studies, Singapore, Singapore
关键词
REPORTING GUIDELINES; CHATGPT;
D O I
10.1111/jnu.12938
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
The integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) into academic research writing has revolutionized the field, offering powerful tools like ChatGPT and Bard to aid researchers in content generation and idea enhancement. We explore the current state of transparency regarding generative AI use in nursing academic research journals, emphasizing the need for explicitly declaring the use of generative AI by authors in the manuscript. Out of 125 nursing studies journals, 37.6% required explicit statements about generative AI use in their authors' guidelines. No significant differences in impact factors or journal categories were found between journals with and without such requirement. A similar evaluation of medicine, general and internal journals showed a lower percentage (14.5%) including the information about generative AI usage. Declaring generative AI tool usage is crucial for maintaining the transparency and credibility in academic writing. Additionally, extending the requirement for AI usage declarations to journal reviewers can enhance the quality of peer review and combat predatory journals in the academic publishing landscape. Our study highlights the need for active participation from nursing researchers in discussions surrounding standardization of generative AI declaration in academic research writing.
引用
收藏
页码:314 / 318
页数:5
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] Institutional review board approval and publication of human research results
    Amdur, RJ
    Biddle, C
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1997, 277 (11): : 909 - 914
  • [2] ChatGPT: standard reporting guidelines for responsible use
    Cacciamani, Giovanni E.
    Gill, Inderbir S.
    Collins, Gary S.
    [J]. NATURE, 2023, 618 (7964) : 238 - 238
  • [3] Clarivate, 2022, 2011 J CIT REP SCI E
  • [4] Nonhuman "Authors" and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge
    Flanagin, Annette
    Bibbins-Domingo, Kirsten
    Berkwits, Michael
    Christiansen, Stacy L.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2023, 329 (08): : 637 - 639
  • [5] Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation
    Ji, Ziwei
    Lee, Nayeon
    Frieske, Rita
    Yu, Tiezheng
    Su, Dan
    Xu, Yan
    Ishii, Etsuko
    Bang, Ye Jin
    Madotto, Andrea
    Fung, Pascale
    [J]. ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, 2023, 55 (12)
  • [6] Liu XX, 2020, LANCET DIGIT HEALTH, V2, pE537, DOI [10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30218-1, 10.1136/bmj.m3164, 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30219-3]
  • [7] ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing
    Lund, Brady D.
    Wang, Ting
    Mannuru, Nishith Reddy
    Nie, Bing
    Shimray, Somipam
    Wang, Ziang
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 74 (05) : 570 - 581
  • [10] Republic of Namibia Office of the Prime Minister, 2023, Namibia livelihood vulnerability assessment and analysis (VAA)