Use of AI

Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat (Abdimasnu) recognizes the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in research, academic writing, and editorial workflows. While AI tools may offer benefits in language refinement and administrative efficiency, their use in medical publishing requires strict regulation because published content may influence patient care, clinical decision-making, and public health. This policy establishes comprehensive standards governing the responsible use of AI by authors, editors, and peer reviewers, with an emphasis on transparency, accountability, and scientific integrity.

 

General Principles

AI tools may be used only as supportive instruments. They must not replace human intellectual contribution, professional judgment, or ethical responsibility. AI technologies cannot assume accountability for scientific content, authorship, editorial decisions, or peer-review evaluations. All individuals involved in the publication process remain fully responsible for compliance with ethical, scientific, and confidentiality standards.

Generative AI applications (e.g., large language models or image-generation tools) do not meet the criteria for authorship and must not be listed as authors under any circumstances.

AI Use by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted tools exclusively for language-related purposes, such as grammar correction, stylistic refinement, and improvement of manuscript clarity. Such use must not alter scientific meaning, clinical interpretation, or conclusions, and must not involve the generation of research ideas, hypotheses, data, data analysis, clinical recommendations, or references.

All AI use must be explicitly disclosed in the manuscript and described with sufficient detail to ensure transparency and reproducibility. As general guidance, AI-writing similarity detected by screening tools should ideally not exceed approximately twenty percent when AI use is limited to language-related assistance. Detection results are interpreted contextually and are not used as the sole basis for editorial decisions.

Authors retain full responsibility for the originality, accuracy, ethical compliance, and clinical validity of all submitted content.

Specific Disclosure Requirements for Authors

When AI tools are used, authors must clearly disclose their involvement as follows:

  • Text assistance: Authors must describe how the AI tool was used, ensure all factual statements and interpretations are properly cited, and include the disclosure in the manuscript’s Disclosure section.
  • Image generation or modification: The method used must be clearly described and explicitly declared in the corresponding image caption(s).
  • Data analysis or text/data mining: A complete description of the analytical process must be provided, identifying datasets, materials, and methods used, with appropriate references and citations.
  • Third-party material: AI-assisted content must not reproduce others’ ideas, wording, images, or data without proper acknowledgment or permission.

Descriptions of AI use must specify, where applicable, the tool or algorithm name and version, access source, any proprietary components, user modifications, and dates of use. Potential biases, limitations, or competing interests related to the AI tool must also be transparently disclosed and, where relevant, discussed in the manuscript.

AI Use by Editors

Editors may use AI tools only for administrative assistance, workflow support, or language refinement of editorial correspondence, provided that such use does not involve uploading, sharing, or processing confidential manuscript content. AI tools must not be used to assess scientific merit, evaluate clinical validity, or make editorial decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection.Editors are responsible for safeguarding the confidentiality of unpublished manuscripts, patient-related information, and reviewer identities. All editorial decisions must be made by human editors and remain subject to established editorial and ethical standards.

AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers may use AI-assisted tools in a limited and responsible manner to support general language refinement of their review reports, provided that such use does not involve uploading, sharing, or processing any portion of the submitted manuscript or associated data on external platforms. AI tools must not be used to analyze, summarize, evaluate, or generate judgments on the scientific or clinical content of the manuscript.Peer reviews must be based on the reviewer’s independent expertise, professional judgment, and critical evaluation. AI-assisted tools must not be used to generate substantive peer-review comments, recommendations, or editorial decisions. Reviewers are required to maintain strict confidentiality of all materials provided for review and to ensure that any permitted AI use does not compromise the integrity or independence of the peer-review process.

AI Detection and Editorial Oversight

The journal may employ AI-detection software as a screening aid to support editorial oversight. Detection outcomes are reviewed in conjunction with manuscript quality, ethical compliance, and disciplinary norms. Numerical AI scores are advisory and do not constitute definitive evidence of misconduct.

Accountability and Ethical Compliance

The use of AI does not diminish obligations related to research ethics approval, informed consent, patient confidentiality, conflict-of-interest disclosure, or compliance with international standards of medical publishing. All participants in the publication process remain fully accountable for their respective roles.

Violations and Consequences

Failure to comply with this policy may result in corrective actions, including mandatory revision, rejection, withdrawal of editorial or peer-review privileges, post-publication correction or retraction, or further investigation in accordance with the journal’s ethical procedures.

Ethical and Indexation Alignment

This unified policy aligns with the principles of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and the ethical expectations of major indexing and abstracting services, including Scopus and Web of Science."