SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review Among Top 100 Medical Journals
4 references·9 citing·34 second hop
Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review Among Top 100 Medical Journals (2024)Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Re…Publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis (2024)Publishers’ and journals’ ins…Can Large Language Models Provide Useful Feedback on Research Papers? A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis (2024)Can Large Language Models Pro…Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots (2023)Guidance for Authors, Peer Re…Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review (2023)Fighting reviewer fatigue or …Artificial intelligence in scholarly peer review: a scoping review of applications, risks, and governance challenges (2026)Artificial intelligence in sc…When and how to disclose AI use in academic publishing: AMEE Guide No.192 (2025)When and how to disclose AI u…Personal experience with AI-generated peer reviews: a case study (2025)Personal experience with AI-g…Peer Review in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Call for Developing Responsible Integration Guidelines (2025)Peer Review in the Artificial…Large language models in peer review: challenges and opportunities (2025)Large language models in peer…Ensuring peer review integrity in the era of large language models: A critical stocktaking of challenges, red flags, and recommendations (2025)Ensuring peer review integrit…Defining the Boundaries of AI Use in Scientific Writing: A Comparative Review of Editorial Policies (2025)Defining the Boundaries of AI…AI is transforming peer review — and many scientists are worried (2025)AI is transforming peer revie…A Cross‐Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review (2025)A Cross‐Disciplinary Analysis…Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)The limitations to our understanding of peer review (2020)Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT for Automating Systematic Review Process: Methodology, Case Study, Limitations, and Future Directions (2023)The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts (2023)The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool (2024)Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge (2023)Can ChatGPT evaluate research quality? (2024)Reporting Use of AI in Research and Scholarly Publication—JAMA Network Guidance (2024)Predatory publishers are corrupting open access (2012)Guidelines for ethical use and acknowledgement of large language models in academic writing (2024)CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials (2025)The role of generative AI in academic and scientific authorship: an autopoietic perspective (2025)Bias in peer review (2012)The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals (2013)Art and the science of generative AI (2023)ChatGPT-supported collaborative argumentation: Integrating collaboration script and argument mapping to enhance EFL students’ argumentation skills (2024)The grass is not always greener: Teacher vs. GPT-assisted written corrective feedback (2024)Quantifying large language model usage in scientific papers (2025)Growth rates of modern science: a latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases (2021)The Transparency Paradox: Why Researchers Avoid Disclosing AI Assistance in Scientific Writing (2025)Use of artificial intelligence and the future of peer review (2024)Beyond efficiency: How artificial intelligence (AI) will reshape scientific inquiry and the publication process (2025)The junkification of research (2025)Writing is thinking (2025)Aion Framework: Dimensional Emergence of AI Consciousness, Observer-Induced Collapse, and Cosmological Portal Dynamics (2023)The strain on scientific publishing (2024)A large-scale randomized study of large language model feedback in peer review (2026)Chatbots, generative AI, and scholarly manuscripts: WAME recommendations on chatbots and generative artificial intelligence in relation to scholarly publications (2023)The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise (2016)Trust in Science and the Science of Trust (2016)Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension (2020)The ethics of ChatGPT – Exploring the ethical issues of an emerging technology (2023)The manifold costs of being a non-native English speaker in science (2023)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2023Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review268 cited
  • 2024Publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis259 cited
  • 2024Can Large Language Models Provide Useful Feedback on Research Papers? A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis253 cited
  • 2023Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots141 cited

Cited by

  • 2025Defining the Boundaries of AI Use in Scientific Writing: A Comparative Review of Editorial Policies64 cited
  • 2025AI is transforming peer review — and many scientists are worried61 cited
  • 2025When and how to disclose AI use in academic publishing: AMEE Guide No.19236 cited
  • 2025Peer Review in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Call for Developing Responsible Integration Guidelines20 cited
  • 2025Ensuring peer review integrity in the era of large language models: A critical stocktaking of challenges, red flags, and recommendations18 cited
  • 2025A Cross‐Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review17 cited
  • 2025Personal experience with AI-generated peer reviews: a case study15 cited
  • 2025Large language models in peer review: challenges and opportunities15 cited
  • 2026Artificial intelligence in scholarly peer review: a scoping review of applications, risks, and governance challenges

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

13 cited