Bioedunis Journal recognizes the significance of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning in scholarly publishing. As generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and others become increasingly accessible, Bioedunis Journal emphasizes the importance of addressing both their potential advantages and the ethical considerations involved. This policy outlines the journal’s official position on the use of AI tools by authors, reviewers, and editorial staff, ensuring compliance with the standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Elsevier, and Taylor & Francis.
Use of AI Tools by Authors
Authors are permitted to use AI tools to support the preparation of manuscripts, provided such use is transparent, responsible, and ethical. AI tools may be used for tasks such as language editing, grammar improvement, and reference formatting. However, AI must not be used to generate content that substitutes for original scientific thinking or interpretation of results. Crucially, authors remain solely responsible for the content of their work, including any sections developed with the help of AI tools.
In accordance with the COPE Position Statement (2023), AI tools cannot be listed as authors under any circumstances. Authorship implies the capacity for accountability, consent, and intellectual contribution—criteria which AI tools do not fulfill. Therefore, all named authors must be human individuals who meet established authorship requirements.
Disclosure of AI Use
Authors must fully disclose the use of AI tools in their manuscript submissions. This includes, but is not limited to, tools used for text generation, image creation, data analysis, coding assistance, or translation. The disclosure should be placed in the "Declaration of the Use of AI" section of the manuscript and should specify the name of the AI tool, the version used, and the purpose of its application.
For example, authors may include a statement such as:
“The author(s) used OpenAI’s ChatGPT to edit and refine the wording of the Introduction. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the authors.”
or
"During the preparation of this work, the authors used ChatGPT to enhance the clarity of the writing. After using ChatGPT, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and took full responsibility for the publication’s content."
Failure to disclose AI usage may be considered a breach of ethical publishing standards and could result in rejection or retraction of the article.
For authors who did not use any AI tools in the preparation of their work, no disclosure statement is required. Authors may simply omit any reference to AI use in the declaration.
If authors prefer to state this explicitly, they may include an optional statement such as:
“The author(s) affirm that no artificial intelligence (AI) tools were used in the writing, analysis, or preparation of this manuscript.”
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images, and artwork
We do not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software might be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.
The only exception is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data, for example in the field of biomedical imaging). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors should adhere to the AI software’s specific usage policies and ensure correct content attribution. Where applicable, authors could be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted versions of images and/or the composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions, for editorial assessment.
The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork such as for graphical abstracts is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may in some cases be allowed, if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the relevant material, and ensures that there is correct content attribution.
Author Responsibility and Accountability
Authors are wholly responsible for the content and integrity of their manuscripts. Even when AI tools are used to assist in writing or other tasks, authors must ensure the accuracy, originality, and appropriateness of the final submission. Authors are expected to verify that AI-generated content does not contain hallucinated references, incorrect scientific claims, biased interpretations, or plagiarized text.
Misuse of AI tools, including submission of entirely or largely AI-generated papers without human oversight or disclosure, will be treated as unethical conduct in accordance with COPE guidelines and Bioedunis Journal’s editorial policy.
Use of AI in Peer Review
Bioedunis Journal expects all peer reviewers to conduct their evaluations based on confidentiality, integrity, and scholarly competence. Peer reviewers are chosen experts in their fields and should not be using Generative AI for analysis or to summarise submitted articles or portions thereof in the creation of their reviews. The use of manuscripts in Generative AI systems may give rise to risks around confidentiality, infringement of proprietary rights and data and other risks. As such, peer reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or project proposals, including any associated files, images, or information, into Generative AI tools.
Reviewers must not use artificial intelligence (AI), including large language model (LLM)–based tools such as ChatGPT, to generate the substantive content of manuscript or proposal review reports. Generative AI may be used solely for non-content purposes, such as improving the grammar, clarity, or language of a review that has been independently written by the reviewer. In doing so, reviewers must ensure that no manuscript content, proposal material, personal data, or other confidential information is uploaded to or shared with any AI system, and any such use must be disclosed to the editor. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and confidentiality of their reports at all times. The editorial team reserves the right to reject any review produced through inappropriate or undisclosed use of AI tools.
Editorial Use of AI
Editorial staff at Bioedunis Journal may utilize AI tools to support non-decision-making tasks such as plagiarism detection, formatting checks, and language editing. However, AI tools will not be used to make acceptance or rejection decisions. All editorial judgments will be made by qualified human editors to ensure accountability and adherence to ethical standards.
Ethical Considerations and Bias Prevention
The use of AI must not compromise ethical integrity, and authors must ensure that AI tools do not introduce bias, misrepresentation, or offensive content. Authors are encouraged to critically assess AI-generated outputs and to avoid over-reliance on such tools, particularly in tasks that require nuanced academic judgment.
Violations and Consequences
Any attempt to misrepresent AI-generated content as original work, fabricate references or data with AI, or fail to disclose the use of AI tools may constitute a breach of publication ethics. Bioedunis Journal reserves the right to:
- Reject the manuscript outright
- Request revisions or corrections
- Retract the article post-publication
- Inform the authors’ affiliated institutions, if necessary
All such cases will be investigated following COPE guidelines on misconduct.
Policy Review and Updates
This AI policy will be reviewed regularly and updated as necessary to reflect technological advancements and evolving best practices in academic publishing. Bioedunis Journal remains committed to supporting responsible innovation while protecting the quality and integrity of scholarly communication.
Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Bioedunis Journal welcomes scholarly discussion and corrections concerning published articles. Readers may submit comments, concerns, or proposed corrections to the Editor-in-Chief by email, clearly identifying the article and providing supporting evidence where appropriate. Submissions are assessed for relevance, accuracy, and scholarly merit. If accepted, they will be published in a subsequent issue as a Letter to the Editor. The authors of the original article will be given an opportunity to respond, and their response may be published as a Reply to the Letter to the Editor.
References
- Elsevier (2023). Generative AI policies for journals.
https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/generative-ai-policies-for-journals - Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2023). Position statement on authorship and AI tools.
https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/authorship-and-ai-tools - Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2024). Discussion document on AI and peer review.
https://publicationethics.org/news/cope-publishes-guidance-on-ai-in-peer-review - Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2023). Discussion paper: Ethical considerations in the use of generative AI in publishing.
https://publicationethics.org/topic-discussions/artificial-intelligence-ai-and-fake-papers - Taylor and Francis (2026). AI policy. https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/reviewer-guidelines