Abstract
Introduction/Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming dermatology research by revolutionizing data analysis, advancing systematic reviews, and driving clinical innovation. However, as the adoption of AI grows, concerns about transparency, ethical use, and reproducibility have become increasingly prominent. This study evaluates how leading dermatology journals address these challenges and opportunities, focusing specifically on their author instructions and policies.
Methods: A comprehensive, cross-sectional analysis was conducted on the top 100 peer-reviewed Dermatology journals, as ranked by the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator. Data was extracted from each journal’s "Instructions for Authors" to identify AI-related policies, such as guidelines for AI usage, authorship requirements, and the use of AI in manuscript development and image creation. Correlational analyses were performed to explore potential links between AI policy presence and journal characteristics.
Results: Of the 100 journals reviewed, 45% addressed AI in their author instructions. The majority prohibited AI-generated authorship while requiring disclosure of AI's role in submissions. 17% of journals allowed AI-generated content, and 28% permitted AI-created images. We found no correlation between impact factor and the inclusion of AI policies, as the number of journals mentioning AI policies was fairly consistent across both high and low impact factor categories.
Conclusions: Although many Dermatology journals acknowledge AI’s growing influence in research, few offer AI-specific reporting guidelines, limiting the standardization and transparency of its use. To foster ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research, we advocate for the widespread adoption of comprehensive AI policies.
Methods: A comprehensive, cross-sectional analysis was conducted on the top 100 peer-reviewed Dermatology journals, as ranked by the 2023 SCImago SJR indicator. Data was extracted from each journal’s "Instructions for Authors" to identify AI-related policies, such as guidelines for AI usage, authorship requirements, and the use of AI in manuscript development and image creation. Correlational analyses were performed to explore potential links between AI policy presence and journal characteristics.
Results: Of the 100 journals reviewed, 45% addressed AI in their author instructions. The majority prohibited AI-generated authorship while requiring disclosure of AI's role in submissions. 17% of journals allowed AI-generated content, and 28% permitted AI-created images. We found no correlation between impact factor and the inclusion of AI policies, as the number of journals mentioning AI policies was fairly consistent across both high and low impact factor categories.
Conclusions: Although many Dermatology journals acknowledge AI’s growing influence in research, few offer AI-specific reporting guidelines, limiting the standardization and transparency of its use. To foster ethical, reproducible, and high-quality research, we advocate for the widespread adoption of comprehensive AI policies.
| 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
- dermatology