Rise of the machines: trends and challenges of implementing AI in biomedical scientific writing

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology is advancing significantly, with many applications already in medicine, healthcare, and biomedical research. Among these fields, the area that AI is remarkably reshaping is biomedical scientific writing. Thousands of AI-based tools can be applied at every step of the writing process, improving time effectiveness, and streamlining authors’ workflow. Out of this variety, choosing the best software for a particular task may pose a challenge. While ChatGPT receives the necessary attention, other AI software should be addressed. In this review, we draw attention to a broad spectrum of AI tools to provide users with a perspective on which steps of their work can be improved. Several medical journals developed policies toward the usage of AI in writing. Even though they refer to the same technology, they differ, leaving a substantially gray area prone to abuse. To address this issue, we comprehensively discuss common ambiguities regarding AI in biomedical scientific writing, such as plagiarism, copyrights, and the obligation of reporting its implementation. In addition, this article aims to raise awareness about misconduct due to insufficient detection, lack of reporting, and unethical practices revolving around AI that might threaten unaware authors and medical society. We provide advice for authors who wish to implement AI in their daily work, emphasizing the need for transparency and the obligation together with the responsibility to maintain biomedical research credibility in the age of artificially enhanced science.

Keywords

Artificial intelligence / AI-based tools / biomedical scientific writing / medical journals / biomedical publishing

References

[1] Jobin A, Ienca M, Vayena E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nat Mach Intell. 2019; 1:389-99.

[2] Jindal JA, Lungren MP, Shah NH. Ensuring useful adoption of generative artificial intelligence in healthcare. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024; 31:1441-44.

[3] Raman R, Lathabhai H, Diwakar S, Nedungadi P. Early Research Trends on ChatGPT: Insights from Altmetrics and Science Mapping Analysis. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. (IJET). 2023; 18:13-31.

[4] Xu Y, Liu X, Cao X, Huang C, Liu E, Qian S, et al. Artificial intelligence: A powerful paradigm for scientific research. Innovation (Camb). 2021; 2:100179.

[5] Zhou Q, Chen Z, Cao Y, Peng S. Clinical impact and quality of randomized controlled trials involving interventions evaluating artificial intelligence prediction tools: a systematic review. NPJ Digit Med. 2021; 4:154.

[6] Lam TYT, Cheung MFK, Munro YL, Lim KM, Shung D, Sung JJY. Randomized Controlled Trials of Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Practice: Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res. 2022; 24:e37188.

[7] Beam AL, Drazen JM, Kohane IS, Leong T, Manrai AK, Rubin EJ. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. N Engl J Med. 2023; 388:1220-1.

[8] Manrai AK, Beam AL, Kohane IS. What We Want to Publish at NEJM AI . NEJM AI. 2024; 1:AIe2300304.

[9] Mahjour B, Hoffstadt J, Cernak T. Designing Chemical Reaction Arrays Using Phactor and ChatGPT. Org Process Res Dev. 2023; 27:1510-6.

[10] Hryciw BN, Seely AJE, Kyeremanteng K. Guiding principles and proposed classification system for the responsible adoption of artificial intelligence in scientific writing in medicine. Front Artif Intell. 2023; 6:1283353.

[11] Feng X, Zhang H, Ren Y, Shang P, Zhu Y, Liang Y, et al. The Deep Learning-Based Recommender System "Pubmender" for Choosing a Biomedical Publication Venue: Development and Validation Study. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21:e12957.

[12] Doyal AS, Sender D, Nanda M, Serrano RA. ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence in Medical Writing: Concerns and Ethical Considerations. Cureus. 2023; 15:e43292.

[13] Khalifa M, Albadawy M. Using artificial intelligence in academic writing and research: An essential productivity tool. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update. 2024; 5:100145.

[14] Futurepedia_3K+_AI_Tools_Dataset [Internet]. Los Angeles:kaggle.com. Available from: https://kaggle.com/datasets/shahriarrahman009/futureidea-ai-tools-dataset

[15] Zawacki-Richter O, Marín VI, Bond M, Gouverneur F. Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education-where are the educators? Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2019; 16:1-27.

[16] Number of ChatGPT Users (Aug 2024) [Internet]. San Francisco:explodingtopics.com. Available from: https://explodingtopics.com/blog/chatgpt-users

[17] Pal S, Bhattacharya M, Islam MA, Chakraborty C. AI-enabled ChatGPT or LLM: a new algorithm is required for plagiarism-free scientific writing. Int J Surg. 2024; 110:1329-30.

[18] Silva JATd. Linguistic precision, and declared use of ChatGPT, needed for radiology literature. Eur J Radiol. 2024; 170:111212.

[19] Carobene A, Padoan A, Cabitza F, Banfi G, Plebani M. Rising adoption of artificial intelligence in scientific publishing: evaluating the role, risks, and ethical implications in paper drafting and review process. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2023; 62:835-43.

[20] Aliyeva A, Sari E. Be or Not to Be With ChatGPT? Cureus. 2023; 15:e48366.

[21] He S, Yang F, Zuo J, Lin Z. ChatGPT for scientific paper writing-promises and perils. Innovation (Camb). 2023; 4:100524.

[22] Mohammad B, Supti T, Alzubaidi M, Shah H, Alam T, Shah Z, et al. The Pros and Cons of Using ChatGPT in Medical Education: A Scoping Review. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2023; 305:644-7.

[23] Kung TH, Cheatham M, Medenilla A, Sillos C, Leon LD, Elepaño C, et al. Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLOS Digit Health. 2023; 2:e0000198.

[24] Kufel J, Paszkiewicz I, Bielówka M, Bartnikowska W, Janik M, Stencel M, et al. Will ChatGPT pass the Polish specialty exam in radiology and diagnostic imaging? Insights into strengths and limitations. Pol J Radiol. 2023; 88:e430-4.

[25] Barbour AB, Barbour TA. A Radiation Oncology Board Exam of ChatGPT. Cureus. 2023; 15:e44541.

[26] Madrid-García A, Rosales-Rosado Z, Freites-Nuñez D, Pérez-Sancristóbal I, Pato-Cour E, Plasencia-Rodríguez C, et al. Harnessing ChatGPT and GPT-4 for evaluating the rheumatology questions of the Spanish access exam to specialized medical training. Sci Rep. 2023; 13:22129.

[27] Ganjavi 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.

[28] Akobeng AK. Principles of evidence based medicine. Arch Dis Child. 2005; 90:837-40.

[29] Hannousse A. Searching relevant papers for software engineering secondary studies: Semantic Scholar coverage and identification role. IET Software. 2021; 15:126-46.

[30] Jhajj KS, Jindal P, Kaur K. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools for Research by Medical Students: A Narrative Review. Cureus. 2024; 16:e55367.

[31] Brody S. Scite. J Med Libr Assoc. 2021; 109:707-10.

[32] Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, Keitz S, Fontelo P. Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007; 7:16.

[33] Kebede MM, Cornet CL, Fortner RT. In-depth evaluation of machine learning methods for semi-automating article screening in a systematic review of mechanistic literature. Res Synth Methods. 2023; 14:156-72.

[34] Peng Y, Rousseau JF, Shortliffe EH, Weng C. AI-generated text may have a role in evidence-based medicine. Nat Med. 2023; 29:1593-4.

[35] Joel TM, Oluwaseun E, Liza M, Brenlea F, Mark H, Jordyn F, et al. PICO Portal. J Can Health Libr Assoc J Assoc Bibl Santé Can. 2021; 42:181-3.

[36] Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016; 5:210.

[37] Martin K. AI language models are transforming the medical writing space - like it or not! Med Writ. 2023; 32:22-7.

[38] Gao CA, Howard FM, Markov NS, Dyer EC, Ramesh S, Luo Y, et al. Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. NPJ Digit Med. 2023; 6:75.

[39] Zhavoronkov A. Caution with AI-generated content in biomedicine. Nat Med. 2023; 29:532.

[40] Helfrich-Schkarbanenko A. ChatWithPDF- & WebPilot-Plugin. In: Mathematik und ChatGPT. Berlin: Springer; 2023. pp. 247-57.

[41] Chubb LA. Me and the Machines: Possibilities and Pitfalls of Using Artificial Intelligence for Qualitative Data Analysis. Int J Qual Methods. 2023; 22:1-16.

[42] Fostikov A. First impressions on using AI powered chatbots, tools and search engines: ChatGPT, Perplexity and other - possibilities and usage problems. Review of the NCD. 2023; 42:12-21.

[43] Whitfield S, Hofmann MA. Elicit: AI literature review research assistant. Public Serv Q. 2023; 19:201-7.

[44] Dis EAMv, Bollen J, Zuidema W, Rooij Rv, Bockting CL. ChatGPT: five priorities for research. Nature. 2023; 614:224-6.

[45] Walters WH, Wilder EI. Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT. Sci Rep. 2023; 13:14045.

[46] Salvagno M, Taccone FS, Gerli AG. Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? Crit Care. 2023; 27:75.

[47] Noorden RV, Perkel JM. AI and science: what 1,600 researchers think. Nature. 2023; 621:672-5.

[48] Petare PA. Artificial Intelligence Tools for Education: Exploring The New Horizons For Teaching Learning Process. In: Exploring new horizons: multidisciplinary perspectives in research. 1st ed. New Delhi: Unicorn Books; 2023. pp. 76-7.

[49] Ali GM, Fathia R. The role of Grammarly in assessing English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. Lingua Cult. 2018; 12:395-403.

[50] Amyatun RL, Kholis A. Can Artificial Intelligence (AI) like QuillBot AI Assist Students’ Writing Skills? Assisting Learning to Write Texts using AI. ELE Rev Engl Lang Educ Rev. 2023; 3:135-54.

[51] Nazari N, Shabbir MS, Setiawan R. Application of Artificial Intelligence powered digital writing assistant in higher education: randomized controlled trial. Heliyon. 2021; 7:e07014.

[52] Cavaleri M, Dianati S. You want me to check your grammar again? The usefulness of an online grammar checker as perceived by students. J Acad Lang Learn. 2016; 10:A223-36.

[53] Gunter DW editor. Blockchain and Scholarly Publishing Industry: Current Use Cases-New Efficiencies in Scholarly Publishing. Harrisburg: IGI Global; 2021. pp. 284-93.

[54] Zhao X. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technology for English Writing: Introducing Wordtune as a Digital Writing Assistant for EFL Writers. RELC J. 2023; 54:890-4.

[55] Zhao X, Sbaffi L, Cox A. The Digitisation of Writing in Higher Education: Exploring the Use of Wordtune as an AI Writing Assistant. 2023. OSF preprint.

[56] Pinzolits RFG. AI in academia: An overview of selected tools and their areas of application. MAP Educ Humanit. 2024; 4:37-50.

[57] Checco A, Bracciale L, Loreti P, Pinfield S, Bianchi G. AI-assisted peer review. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2021; 8:25.

[58] Knoedler S, Sofo G, Kern B, Frank K, Cotofana S, Isenburg Sv, et al. Modern Machiavelli? The illusion of ChatGPT-generated patient reviews in plastic and aesthetic surgery based on 9000 review classifications. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2024; 88:99-108.

[59] Gilbert FJ, Denison AR. Research misconduct. Clin Radiol. 2003; 58:499-504.

[60] Lee J, Le T, Chen J, Lee D. Do language models plagiarize? In: Ding Y, Tang J, Sequeda J, editors. WWW’23: The ACM Web Conference 2023; 2023 Apr 30-May 4; Austin, United States. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2023. pp. 3637-47.

[61] Higgins JR, Lin F, Evans JP. Plagiarism in submitted manuscripts: incidence, characteristics and optimization of screening-case study in a major specialty medical journal. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016; 1:13.

[62] Benaim EH, Wase S, Zaidi S, Monk A, Klatt-Cromwell C, Thorp BD, et al. Detection of plagiarism among rhinology scientific journals. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2024.

[63] Pan ET, Florian-Rodriguez M. Human vs machine: identifying ChatGPT-generated abstracts in Gynecology and Urogynecology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024; 231:276.e1-276.e10.

[64] Yang W, Sun N, Song H. Analysis of the retraction papers in oncology field from Chinese scholars from 2013 to 2022. J Cancer Res Ther. 2024; 20:592-8.

[65] Singh A, Botros M, Guirguis P, Punreddy A, Mesfin A, Puvanesarajah V. Prevalence, Characteristics, and Trends in Retracted Spine Literature: 2000-2023. World Neurosurg. 2024; 187:e313-20.

[66] Punreddy A, Guirguis PG, Youssef M, Botros M. Current trends in retraction of plastic surgery and reconstruction research. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2024; 93:136-9.

[67] Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Kashfi K, Ghasemi A. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Citation. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2020; 18:e102622.

[68] Zuccon G, Koopman B, Shaik R. Chatgpt Hallucinates when Attributing Answers. In: Ai Q, Liu Y, Moffat A, Huang X, editors. Research and Development in Information Retrieval. SIGIR-AR’23: Proceedings of the Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval in the Asia Pacific Region; 2023 Nov 26-28; Beijing China. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2023. pp. 46-51.

[69] Hugenholtz PB, Quintais JP. Copyright and Artificial Creation: Does EU Copyright Law Protect AI-Assisted Output? IIC-Int Rev Intellect Prop Compet Law. 2021; 52:1190-216.

[70] Generative artificial intelligence and copyright law [Internet]. New York: Elsevier Inc. Available from:https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/scholcom/243/

[71] CUAJ E. Use of AI in medical publishing. Can Urol Assoc J. 2023; 17:79-80.

[72] Conroy G. Scientific sleuths spot dishonest ChatGPT use in papers. Nature. 2023.

[73] Prillaman M. ‘ChatGPT detector’ catches AI-generated papers with unprecedented accuracy. Nature. 2023.

[74] Silva JATd. "Tortured phrases" in preprints. Curr Med Res Opin. 2023; 39:785-7.

[75] Else H. ‘Tortured phrases’ give away fabricated research papers. Nature. 2021; 596:328-9.

[76] Májovský M, Černý M, Kasal M, Komarc M, Netuka D. Artificial Intelligence Can Generate Fraudulent but Authentic-Looking Scientific Medical Articles: Pandora’s Box Has Been Opened. J Med Internet Res. 2023; 25:e46924.

[77] Liverpool L. AI intensifies fight against ‘paper mills’ that churn out fake research. Nature. 2023; 618:222-3.

[78] Else H. ‘Papermill alarm’ software flags potentially fake papers. Nature. 2022.

[79] Noorden RV. How big is science’s fake-paper problem? Nature. 2023; 623:466-7.

[80] Jones N. How to stop AI deepfakes from sinking society - and science. Nature. 2023; 621:676-9.

[81] Mangaokar N, Pu J, Bhattacharya P, Reddy CK, Viswanath B. Jekyll: Attacking Medical Image Diagnostics using Deep Generative Models. 2020 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P). 2020;139-57.

[82] Schetinger V, Bartolomeo SD, El-Assady M, McNutt A, Miller M, Passos JPA, et al. Doom or Deliciousness: Challenges and Opportunities for Visualization in the Age of Generative Models. Comput Graph Forum. 2023; 42:423-35.

[83] Hanna DM. The Use of Artificial Intelligence Art Generator “Midjourney” in Artistic and Advertising Creativity. J Des Sci Appl Arts. 2023; 4:42-58.

[84] Noorden RV. More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 - a new record. Nature. 2023; 624:479-81.

[85] Facing reality? law enforcement and the challenge of deepfakes: an observatory report from the Europol innovation lab [Internet]. Luxembourg: European Union. Available from:https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2813/158794

[86] Krenn M, Buffoni L, Coutinho B, Eppel S, Foster JG, Gritsevskiy A, et al. Forecasting the future of artificial intelligence with machine learning-based link prediction in an exponentially growing knowledge network. Nat Mach Intell. 2023; 5:1326-35.

[87] Asan O, Bayrak AE, Choudhury A. Artificial Intelligence and Human Trust in Healthcare: Focus on Clinicians. J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22:e15154.

[88] Chan KS, Zary N. Applications and Challenges of Implementing Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Integrative Review. JMIR Med Educ. 2019; 5:e13930.

[89] Mekki YM, Zughaier SM. Teaching artificial intelligence in medicine. Nat Rev. Bioeng. 2024; 2:450-1.

[90] Conroy G. How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing. Nature. 2023; 622:234-6.