Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming ophthalmology by enhancing data analysis, facilitating systematic reviews, and improving clinical applications. However, its incorporation into research and publishing introduces challenges related to transparency, ethical considerations, and reproducibility. This study explores how top ophthalmology journals address these issues and leverage AI's potential through their author guidelines and editorial policies.
Methods: A cross-sectional review of the top 100 peer-reviewed ophthalmology journals, ranked by the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator, was conducted. Data were extracted from the “Instructions for Authors” of each journal to assess AI-related policies, with a focus on authorship criteria, AI-specific reporting guidelines, and the use of AI in manuscript preparation and image generation. Correlational analyses were conducted to investigate potential links between AI policies and the distinctive characteristics of each journal.
Results: Among the 100 journals reviewed, 79% addressed AI use in their author guidelines, with most prohibiting AI authorship but requiring disclosure of AI involvement in submissions. AI-generated content was permitted by 62% of journals, while 24% accepted AI-generated images. Journals with higher impact factors were more likely to implement detailed AI policies; however, significant gaps in standardization and guidance persist.
Conclusion: Although many ophthalmology journals acknowledge AI’s growing role in research, few have adopted AI-specific reporting guidelines, limiting the consistency and transparency of AI integration. We advocate for the development and adoption of comprehensive guidelines to promote ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research in this evolving landscape of AI-driven innovation.
Methods: A cross-sectional review of the top 100 peer-reviewed ophthalmology journals, ranked by the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator, was conducted. Data were extracted from the “Instructions for Authors” of each journal to assess AI-related policies, with a focus on authorship criteria, AI-specific reporting guidelines, and the use of AI in manuscript preparation and image generation. Correlational analyses were conducted to investigate potential links between AI policies and the distinctive characteristics of each journal.
Results: Among the 100 journals reviewed, 79% addressed AI use in their author guidelines, with most prohibiting AI authorship but requiring disclosure of AI involvement in submissions. AI-generated content was permitted by 62% of journals, while 24% accepted AI-generated images. Journals with higher impact factors were more likely to implement detailed AI policies; however, significant gaps in standardization and guidance persist.
Conclusion: Although many ophthalmology journals acknowledge AI’s growing role in research, few have adopted AI-specific reporting guidelines, limiting the consistency and transparency of AI integration. We advocate for the development and adoption of comprehensive guidelines to promote ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research in this evolving landscape of AI-driven innovation.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| State | Published - 14 Feb 2025 |
| Event | Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences Research Week 2025 - Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, United States Duration: 10 Feb 2025 → 14 Feb 2025 https://medicine.okstate.edu/research/research_days.html |
Conference
| Conference | Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences Research Week 2025 |
|---|---|
| Country/Territory | United States |
| City | Tulsa |
| Period | 10/02/25 → 14/02/25 |
| Internet address |
Keywords
- Artificial Intelligence
- reporting guidelines
- authorship
- transparency
- ophthalmology