Scientific writing in the age of artificial intelligence: trust on trial?

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming scientific writing and publishing, creating both unprecedented opportunities and critical ethical challenges. This article investigates how the use of AI tools affects research integrity, authorship accountability, and peer review processes in scientific publishing. Methodologically, the review synthesizes literature on current AI policies, detection tools, and empirical surveys of author and reviewer practices. Three key hypotheses are proposed for future empirical testing: (H1) mandatory AI disclosure improves the detection of fabricated content; (H2) AI-assisted language refinement enhances manuscript clarity without compromising originality; and (H3) undisclosed AI use by reviewers diminishes the depth of critique. The main findings indicate dominant reliance on descriptive studies, highlighting the need for hypothesis-driven, cross-disciplinary research frameworks and greater transparency to ensure that AI adoption fortifies the trustworthiness of scholarly communication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Postgraduate Medical Journal
Published
2025-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgaf215
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.65
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Scientific writing in the age of artificial intelligence: trust on trial?

Abhishek Vaish, Anoop Misra, Raju Vaishya
1 citations
Postgraduate Medical Journal
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
article

Scientific writing in the age of artificial intelligence: trust on trial?

Abhishek Vaish, Anoop Misra, Raju Vaishya
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming scientific writing and publishing, creating both unprecedented opportunities and critical ethical challenges. This article investigates how the use of AI tools affects research integrity, authorship accountability, and peer review processes in scientific publishing. Methodologically, the review synthesizes literature on current AI policies, detection tools, and empirical surveys of author and reviewer practices. Three key hypotheses are proposed for future empirical testing: (H1) mandatory AI disclosure improves the detection of fabricated content; (H2) AI-assisted language refinement enhances manuscript clarity without compromising originality; and (H3) undisclosed AI use by reviewers diminishes the depth of critique. The main findings indicate dominant reliance on descriptive studies, highlighting the need for hypothesis-driven, cross-disciplinary research frameworks and greater transparency to ensure that AI adoption fortifies the trustworthiness of scholarly communication.

Postgraduate Medical Journal
Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals (IN), Fortis C-DOC Hospital (IN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
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.

Scientific writing in the age of artificial intelligence: trust on trial? — Abhishek Vaish, Anoop Misra, et al. · Postgraduate Medical Journal (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS