Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming hematology research by improving data analysis, enhancing systematic reviews, and optimizing clinical decision-making. Despite its growing potential, AI raises concerns regarding transparency, reproducibility, and ethical standards. This study evaluates how leading hematologic medical journals address the AI integration in research through their author guidelines and policies.
Methods: A cross-sectional review was performed on 100 peer-reviewed hematology journals, ranked by the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator. Data was extracted from each journal’s “Instructions for Authors” section to assess AI-related policies, including authorship rules, requirements for disclosing AI involvement, and guidance on using AI for manuscript preparation, data analysis, or image generation. Associations between AI-related policies and journal impact factors were also analyzed.
Results: Among the 100 journals, 56% referenced AI in their author instructions. 29% explicitly prohibited AI authorship, while 52% mandated disclosure of AI use in research or manuscript preparation. Only 6% allowed AI-generated text content, and 10% permitted AI-generated images. Journals with higher impact factors were significantly more likely to include comprehensive AI-related policies. However, nearly 44 % of journals lacked any mention of AI, leaving significant gaps in guidance for authors.
Conclusion: Although many hematology journals acknowledge the role of AI in research, a lack of standardized policies hinders transparency and ethical implementation. Establishing clear, uniform guidelines on AI use is crucial to ensure ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research practices in hematology.
Methods: A cross-sectional review was performed on 100 peer-reviewed hematology journals, ranked by the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator. Data was extracted from each journal’s “Instructions for Authors” section to assess AI-related policies, including authorship rules, requirements for disclosing AI involvement, and guidance on using AI for manuscript preparation, data analysis, or image generation. Associations between AI-related policies and journal impact factors were also analyzed.
Results: Among the 100 journals, 56% referenced AI in their author instructions. 29% explicitly prohibited AI authorship, while 52% mandated disclosure of AI use in research or manuscript preparation. Only 6% allowed AI-generated text content, and 10% permitted AI-generated images. Journals with higher impact factors were significantly more likely to include comprehensive AI-related policies. However, nearly 44 % of journals lacked any mention of AI, leaving significant gaps in guidance for authors.
Conclusion: Although many hematology journals acknowledge the role of AI in research, a lack of standardized policies hinders transparency and ethical implementation. Establishing clear, uniform guidelines on AI use is crucial to ensure ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research practices in hematology.
| 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
- hematology
- ethical standards
- transparency
- reporting guidelines