Archives of Hospital Medicine

Policy on the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Archives of Hospital Medicine (eISSN: XXXX-XXXX, pISSN: XXXX-XXXX) (Arch Hosp Med)

1.0 Preamble: Purpose, Scope, and Guiding Principles

The Archives of Hospital Medicine is committed to upholding the highest standards of transparency, integrity, and accountability in scientific publishing. The emergence of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies (collectively, "AI Tools") presents both opportunities and significant challenges to the scholarly ecosystem.

This policy establishes a clear framework for the responsible use of AI Tools by all stakeholders -authors, reviewers, and editors. Our primary objectives are to:

• Ensure human accountability remains the cornerstone of scholarly work.
• Safeguard confidentiality, intellectual property, and data privacy.
• Promote transparency in the use of all tools that contribute to a manuscript.
• Preserve the integrity, originality, and credibility of the scientific record.

This is a living document and will be periodically reviewed as technology and ethical standards evolve.

Definition: For this policy, "Generative AI" refers to artificial intelligence that can produce various types of content, including text, imagery, audio, and synthetic data (e.g., ChatGPT, DALL-E, Midjourney).

 

PART I: POLICY FOR AUTHORS

2.0 Permissible Use and Core Principles

Authors may use AI Tools to assist in the preparation of manuscripts, but such use is strictly governed by the following non-negotiable principles:

• Human Oversight is Mandatory: AI Tools are not a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise, and judgment. Authors must exercise full oversight and control.
• Ultimate Accountability Rests with the Author: Authors are solely responsible and accountable for the entire content of their work, including any AI-generated output. This encompasses the accuracy, validity, and integrity of the data, analysis, and interpretations presented.
• Limited Scope for Text Generation: AI Tools may be used to enhance the readability, grammar, and language clarity of manuscripts. They must not be used to generate, analyze, or interpret scientific content, formulate conclusions, or generate novel ideas that form the intellectual contribution of the paper, as AI outputs may be inaccurate, incomplete, or biased.

3.0 Authorship and Attribution

Generative AI tools or AI-assisted technologies must not be credited as authors or co-authors. Authorship implies responsibilities that can only be fulfilled by human beings, including:

• Accountability for the work's accuracy and integrity.
• Approval of the final version of the manuscript.
• Agreement to its submission.
• Ability to respond to post-publication critiques and questions.

4.0 Mandatory Disclosure and Transparency

Transparency is paramount. Authors must disclose the use of AI Tools in a dedicated section within the manuscript upon submission. This declaration will be published in the final article.

4.1 Disclosure Statement Format

The following statement must be included in a section titled "Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process" before the reference list:

"During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL/SERVICE, VERSION] to [PURPOSE OF USE, e.g., 'for language editing and improvement of readability']. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as necessary and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication."

4.2 What Requires Disclosure?

• Requires Disclosure: Use of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT for drafting, paraphrasing, or summarizing text.
• Does Not Require Disclosure: Use of basic tools for grammar and spelling checks (e.g., Grammarly), reference management software (e.g., EndNote, Zotero), or widely used word processors.
• Must be Described in Methods: The use of AI in the research process itself (e.g., for data analysis, AI-assisted imaging) must be described in detail in the Methods section with full technical specifications.

5.0 Use in Figures, Images, and Artwork

5.1 General Prohibition

The use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create, modify, or enhance images, figures, or graphical abstracts is strictly prohibited. This includes enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing specific features. The journal reserves the right to use image forensics software to screen for irregularities.

5.2 Exception for Research Methods

An exception is made only if the use of AI is an integral part of the research methodology (e.g., AI-assisted medical image analysis, computational modeling for figure generation). In such cases:

• The use must be described in a reproducible manner in the Methods section, including the tool's name, version, manufacturer, and specific function.
• Authors must be prepared to provide original, unaltered images or raw data for editorial verification upon request.

5.3 Graphical Abstracts and Cover Art

• The use of Generative AI to create graphical abstracts is not permitted.
• The use for cover art may be considered on an exceptional, case-by-case basis with prior written permission from the Editor-in-Chief and Publisher, provided all necessary rights are cleared and the source is fully disclosed.

6.0 Data Privacy and Legal Compliance

Authors must ensure their use of AI Tools is legally compliant:

• Confidentiality: Do not input confidential, proprietary, or unpublished data into public AI Tools, as this may violate agreements or data privacy laws (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA).
• Terms of Service: Verify that the AI Tool's terms do not claim ownership of your inputted data and that the outputs can be used for scholarly publication.

 

PART II: POLICY FOR REVIEWERS

7.0 Strict Prohibition on Use in Peer Review

Reviewers are prohibited from using generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the assessment of manuscripts.

7.1 Confidentiality

The peer review process is confidential. Reviewers must uphold this principle by:

• Not uploading the submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool.
• Not uploading their peer review report into an AI tool, even for language polishing.

7.2 Scientific Assessment

The critical thinking, expertise, and original assessment required for peer review are human responsibilities. Using AI for this task risks generating incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions. The reviewer is personally accountable for the content and judgment within their review report.

 

PART III: POLICY FOR EDITORS

8.0 Prohibition in Editorial Decision-Making

Editors are not permitted to use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the editorial or decision-making process.

8.1 Confidentiality and Judgment

Editors must protect the confidentiality of all submitted materials and communications:

• Do not upload manuscripts, reviewer comments, or decision letters into generative AI tools.
• Do not use AI Tools to assist in evaluating manuscripts or making editorial decisions. The final responsibility rests solely with the human editor.

8.2 Vigilance and Enforcement

Editors should be vigilant for potential violations of this AI policy by authors or reviewers. Any suspected violation should be reported to the Publisher for investigation in accordance with the journal's misconduct procedures.

 

9.0 Compliance and Consequences

Failure to comply with this policy may result in:

• Rejection of the manuscript or revocation of a prior acceptance.
• Retraction of a published article.
• Reporting of misconduct to institutional authorities.
• Prohibition on future submissions for the authors involved.

This policy was updated in July 2026 and supersedes all previous communications. The journal reserves the right to take corrective action for any violation.