Policy on the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies

The editorial board of the journal Actual Dentistry recognizes the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in scientific activity, but emphasizes the priority of human responsibility and academic integrity. In the context of this policy, artificial intelligence includes large language models (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini), as well as any technologies based on machine and deep learning, logical reasoning, knowledge representation, planning, navigation, natural language processing, perception, emergent intelligence, or other similar methods. This also includes technologies capable of making automated decisions.

1. Editorial Approach

We adhere to the principles of transparency. The editorial board considers each case of AI technology use individually, assessing its appropriateness for the scientific process. Our approach fully complies with the recommendations of organizations such as the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  • Author Responsibility
    Authorship implies accountability for content, which can only be borne by a human. Artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be listed as an author or co-author of an article.
  • Responsibility for Content Created or Influenced by AI Technology
    Authors bear full responsibility for content created with or influenced by AI technology. This includes responsibility for accuracy, proper source citation, and absence of plagiarism.
    • Permissible Use of AI
      AI may be used solely as an auxiliary tool for:
      • Improving style, grammar, and spelling (language editing).
      • Technical assistance in organizing references and bibliography.
      • Preliminary collection of generally available data (with mandatory subsequent fact-checking by the author).
    • Prohibited Use of AI
      • Using AI to generate original scientific content (Results, Discussion, or Conclusions).
      • Entering confidential patient data into AI (CT, MRI results, facial photographs, personal information), as this violates privacy rights and ethical norms of medical publication.
      • Using AI to analyze medical data for clinical conclusions without direct expert oversight.
      • Relying on AI to generate reference lists (due to the risk of fabricated sources).

2. Disclosure Requirements

In case of using any AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, software for data analysis or image generation), authors are required to provide information in a separate section of the article — Additional Declarations: Use of AI.

  1. Clearly state the software name and version (e.g., ChatGPT-4o).
  2. Specify exactly what tasks AI was used for (e.g., stylistic editing of English text, translation of an abstract, technical formatting of references).
  3. Authors must confirm that all generated or edited data were manually verified for accuracy.

Example statement: “During the preparation of this work, the authors used [Name of tool] for [purpose description]. After using this tool, the authors verified and edited all AI-generated content for accuracy, factual correctness, and absence of plagiarism, and bear full responsibility for the final result.”

If AI was not used: Authors must add the standard phrase: “The authors confirm that no artificial intelligence technologies were used in the preparation of this manuscript.”

3. Policy for Reviewers

  • Prohibited Use of AI: Reviewers are strictly forbidden to upload manuscripts or their parts into AI tools. This violates confidentiality and copyright, as AI systems may use such data for further training. Reviewers are not allowed to delegate the preparation of review text to AI tools. A review must be the result of the expert’s independent analysis.
  • Permissible Use of AI: AI may be used solely for technical language correction (grammar, style) of the reviewer’s own text, written independently.
  • Detection of Improper AI Use: If during review there are suspicions that authors used AI to generate scientific content without proper disclosure (e.g., fabricated references), the reviewer must indicate this in their conclusion to the editorial office.