References

• 2020The limitations to our understanding of peer review436 cited
• 2023Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review328 cited
• 2023Artificial Intelligence Can Generate Fraudulent but Authentic-Looking Scientific Medical Articles: Pandora’s Box Has Been Opened301 cited
• 2023Using AI to write scholarly publications285 cited
• 2023Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots141 cited
• 2023Best Practices for Using AI Tools as an Author, Peer Reviewer, or Editor125 cited
• 2023How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing120 cited
• 2023Stop the peer-review treadmill. I want to get off71 cited
• 2023Editors’ Statement on the Responsible Use of Generative AI Technologies in Scholarly Journal Publishing48 cited
• 2023ChatGPT, artificial intelligence and scientific writing: What authors, peer reviewers and editors should know46 cited
• 2023Funding agencies say no to AI peer review18 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.