AI and AI-Assisted Technologies Policy

Acceptable AI-Assisted Uses

AI-assisted tools may be used, where appropriate, for language editing, grammar, readability, translation support, outlining, organizing ideas and assisting with manuscript drafts. Such assistance does not replace scholarly judgment, accurate attribution or the need to evaluate evidence critically.

Authors should independently check factual statements, citations, quotations, calculations, interpretations and any other material generated or substantially altered with AI assistance. AI-generated references must not be assumed to be genuine or accurate.

Disclosure of AI Assistance

Authors should disclose material use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies that contributes to manuscript drafting, substantive content, analysis or the creation or modification of research-related images. The disclosure should identify the tool and briefly describe how it was used, in an appropriate part of the manuscript or in a statement supplied to the editorial team.

Routine spelling checks, basic grammar corrections and similar standard editing functions do not ordinarily require a separate AI disclosure. Editors may request clarification where the extent or nature of AI assistance is relevant to the integrity or interpretation of a submission.

Human Authorship and Accountability

AI tools cannot be named as authors or co-authors because they cannot accept responsibility for a scholarly contribution, approve its publication or respond to questions about its integrity. Human authors remain accountable for the originality, accuracy, ethical compliance, permissions and reliability of the manuscript, including any AI-assisted material.

Authors must not present fabricated findings, invented sources, misleading images or unsupported claims as authentic scholarly evidence, whether created by AI or otherwise.

AI in Research Methods and Scholarly Analysis

When AI is used as part of the research method itself—for example, in data analysis, image interpretation, classification or other substantive procedures—authors should describe the role of the technology sufficiently for readers and editors to understand the methods and assess the findings. Applicable ethical approvals, permissions and safeguards remain the responsibility of the researchers.

The GMS does not require authors of ordinary reviews, case reports, perspectives or commentaries to use AI tools or follow AI-specific research methods.

Privacy, Patient Information and Confidential Materials

Authors should not enter identifiable patient information, confidential participant data, unpublished third-party material or other protected information into external AI systems unless they have appropriate authorization and adequate privacy and security safeguards. The use of AI must not compromise informed consent, confidentiality, copyright or applicable legal and institutional requirements.

AI Use by Reviewers and Editors

Peer reviewers and editors must preserve the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and related communications. They should not upload unpublished manuscripts, figures, review materials or confidential editorial information into public or external AI tools without explicit authorization and appropriate safeguards.

AI may assist with limited administrative or language-related tasks where confidentiality and integrity are protected, but it must not replace independent human evaluation. Editorial recommendations, peer-review judgments and publication decisions remain the responsibility of qualified people.

Manuscript Development Assistance and Editorial Independence

The GMS may offer optional manuscript development or editorial support to help authors communicate their scholarly work. Any responsible use of AI within such assistance must be subject to human oversight and must not introduce fabricated evidence, false references or misleading claims.

Manuscript development assistance is separate from peer review and editorial decision-making. Purchasing assistance or other optional services does not guarantee acceptance or favorable editorial treatment. Authors remain responsible for reviewing and approving the final content submitted under their names.

Concerns and Policy Review

If questions arise about inaccurate, misleading, undisclosed or otherwise inappropriate AI use, The GMS may request clarification or supporting information and assess the matter under its publication ethics procedures. Concerns will be considered in context; the use of AI alone is not evidence of misconduct.

Because AI technologies and scholarly standards continue to evolve, The GMS may revise this policy as appropriate while preserving its commitment to responsible and accessible scholarly publishing.