Regulating the unseen hand: AI, authorship, and trust in medical science

Large language models (LLMs) have transformed medical research and scientific publishing by facilitating manuscript preparation, literature synthesis, and editorial processes, yet pose significant threats to research integrity through generation of potential pseudoscientific content. Current AI detection algorithms demonstrate inconsistent reliability, particularly against paraphrased or humanized content, while LLM integration in peer review compromises expert critical evaluation and homogenizes scientific discourse. These systems exhibit documented bias against non-male, non-white researchers, compounding ethical concerns. Heterogeneous editorial policies regarding AI disclosure across medical journals create regulatory gaps enabling undetected misconduct. However, excessive focus on detection over content quality risks establishing counterproductive "AI phobia" that impedes legitimate technological integration. Preserving research credibility requires standardized disclosure frameworks, enhanced detection algorithms, comprehensive privacy safeguards, and mandatory AI watermarking systems to maintain scientific integrity while accommodating technological advancement in research practices.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annals of Medicine and Surgery
Published
2025-06-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/ms9.0000000000003498
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Regulating the unseen hand: AI, authorship, and trust in medical science

Naveen Gautam
Annals of Medicine and Surgery
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Regulating the unseen hand: AI, authorship, and trust in medical science

Naveen Gautam
article en

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have transformed medical research and scientific publishing by facilitating manuscript preparation, literature synthesis, and editorial processes, yet pose significant threats to research integrity through generation of potential pseudoscientific content. Current AI detection algorithms demonstrate inconsistent reliability, particularly against paraphrased or humanized content, while LLM integration in peer review compromises expert critical evaluation and homogenizes scientific discourse. These systems exhibit documented bias against non-male, non-white researchers, compounding ethical concerns. Heterogeneous editorial policies regarding AI disclosure across medical journals create regulatory gaps enabling undetected misconduct. However, excessive focus on detection over content quality risks establishing counterproductive "AI phobia" that impedes legitimate technological integration. Preserving research credibility requires standardized disclosure frameworks, enhanced detection algorithms, comprehensive privacy safeguards, and mandatory AI watermarking systems to maintain scientific integrity while accommodating technological advancement in research practices.

Annals of Medicine and SurgeryVol. 87(8)
Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital (NP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Regulating the unseen hand: AI, authorship, and trust in medical science — Naveen Gautam · Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS