AI Policy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Usage Policy

Pharmacoscientia Journal acknowledges that the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies including Generative AI (GenAI), Large Language Models (LLMs), chatbots, and tools for image generation or processing can support various stages of writing, editing, and publishing scholarly work. However, the use of AI technology in the scholarly publication process must uphold the principles of academic integrity, transparency, accuracy, confidentiality, originality, and publication ethics. The use of AI must not diminish the responsibility and role of humans in ensuring the quality and integrity of published scholarly work. This policy is an integral part of Pharmacoscientia’s Author Guidelines, Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, and Plagiarism Policy. These provisions apply to all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members.

1. General Principles

Regarding the use of AI technology, Pharmacoscientia Journal establishes the following principles:

AI serves as an assistive tool, not a substitute for human intellectual and academic responsibility in the processes of writing and scholarly publication.
Authors bear full responsibility for the manuscript's substance, including the factual correctness, authenticity, accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work submitted to the journal.
Reviewers are responsible for the scientific assessment conducted and for all comments, recommendations, and feedback provided regarding the manuscript.
Editors retain full responsibility for editorial decisions, including decisions regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript.
AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author, as it lacks the capacity to fulfill the responsibilities, accountability, and requirements of scholarly authorship.
The use of AI that makes a substantive contribution to the manuscript must be transparently disclosed in accordance with the journal's requirements.
Any output generated by AI must be reviewed, examined, and verified by humans before being used in a manuscript or editorial process to ensure its accuracy, relevance, and reliability.
Confidential or unpublished information from the editorial process must not be entered into an AI system unless that system provides adequate guarantees regarding data protection and confidentiality.
AI must not be used to commit or facilitate violations of publication ethics, including plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, manipulation of research results, or other forms of breaches of scientific integrity.

These provisions align with the principles set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), stating that the use of AI in the preparation of scientific material does not absolve humans of responsibility. Individuals utilizing AI technology remain accountable for the content and accuracy of the generated material, and the use of AI must be transparent throughout the scientific publication process.

2. AI Policy for Authors

2.1. Permissible Use of AI

Authors submitting manuscripts to Pharmacoscientia may utilize artificial intelligence (AI) technology to a limited extent as a supporting tool during the writing and research processes. Such use may include :

checking and correcting grammar, spelling, and sentence structure;
editing and refining language usage;
translating text;
enhancing the clarity and readability of the manuscript;
assisting in the development or formulation of initial ideas;
supporting specific technical tasks, provided that this does not replace the author's intellectual contribution; and
supporting data analysis or processing, provided that such use is disclosed openly, accurately, and transparently.

The use of AI does not absolve authors of their scientific and ethical responsibility for the manuscript. Authors remain responsible for reviewing, checking, and validating any output generated by AI, given that the technology can produce information that is erroneous, incomplete, or biased, or include references that are inaccurate or unverifiable.

2.2. Mandatory Disclosure of AI Use

Authors are required to disclose information regarding the use of AI if the technology is employed substantively during the manuscript preparation process. Such substantive use includes, but is not limited to :

generating or developing text within sections of the manuscript to a significant extent;
conducting analysis or assisting in data interpretation;
generating, processing, or modifying images;
compiling tables or other scientific materials;
performing programming or computational analysis with AI assistance;
conducting substantive translation that affects the scientific content of the manuscript; or
any other form of AI utilization that materially influences the substance or content of the manuscript.

Disclosures regarding AI use must, at a minimum, include information on :

the name or type of AI technology or tool used;
the purpose or function of the AI usage;
the specific sections or stages of the research and/or manuscript preparation that involved AI assistance; and
information regarding the review or verification process undertaken by the authors concerning the AI output, where relevant.

In accordance with the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the use of AI-based technology by authors must be declared at the time of manuscript submission and described within the relevant sections of the manuscript.

2.3. AI as an Author

AI technologies including chatbots, Large Language Models (LLMs), and other AI-based tools cannot be listed as authors, co-authors, or contributors bearing authorship responsibility for a manuscript. This policy is based on AI's inability to meet the requirements for human authorship, including the capacity to :

take responsibility for the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the article's content;
provide final approval for the version of the manuscript to be published;
disclose and declare conflicts of interest;
be accountable for potential violations of publication ethics; and
fulfill all authorship requirements applicable to human authors.

This policy aligns with ICMJE recommendations stating that AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors or co-authors in scientific publications.

2.4. Author Verification and Responsibility

Authors bear full responsibility for ensuring the integrity, accuracy, and reliability of the entire manuscript content, including material prepared with the assistance of AI. Therefore, authors must ensure that :

all information generated or assisted by AI has been checked and verified;
all references used are genuinely available, valid, and traceable;
every citation corresponds to the original scholarly source;
there are no fabricated references;
every scientific claim is supported by adequate evidence;
research data were genuinely obtained through the implemented research procedures and methods;
AI is not used to falsify, fabricate, or manipulate data or research results; and
the manuscript adheres to the principle of originality and is free from plagiarism.

The use of AI technology in manuscript preparation does not diminish or absolve the author of the responsibility to comply with all regulations regarding originality, academic integrity, and plagiarism applicable to Pharmacoscientia.

3. Relationship Between AI Use and Plagiarism Policy

Pharmacoscientia upholds originality, scientific honesty, and academic integrity as core principles in every stage of the publication process. The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Generative AI (GenAI), does not absolve authors of their responsibility regarding the authenticity and integrity of manuscripts submitted to the journal. AI must not be used to :

copy or utilize the work, ideas, or materials of others without appropriate attribution and citation;
disguise or alter text derived from the work of others to evade plagiarism detection;
perform automated paraphrasing for the purpose of bypassing plagiarism or similarity checks;
create, modify, or include references that are invalid, inaccurate, or unverifiable;
use quotes or information from other sources without proper attribution;
claim the work, ideas, data, or contributions of others as one's own;
generate or present research data that was not obtained through an actual research process;
manipulate, alter, or present research findings in a misleading manner; and
engage in any other actions constituting plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other breaches of academic integrity.

Authors remain fully responsible for ensuring that manuscripts submitted to Pharmacoscientia are original, contain appropriate attribution and citation, and comply with all provisions of the Pharmacoscientia Plagiarism Policy. The use of AI cannot be cited as a reason to shift responsibility for violations of publication ethics or academic integrity.

Any text, images, tables, data, or other materials generated or modified with the assistance of AI must be reviewed and verified by the authors. If such material bears a resemblance to the work of others, authors must ensure that attribution, citation, and usage permissions are handled in accordance with applicable regulations.

Authors must also ensure that the use of AI does not result in plagiarism, whether directly or indirectly. This principle aligns with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which affirm that the responsibility for ensuring the absence of plagiarism in text or images created or developed with the aid of AI rests with humans.

Pharmacoscientia may conduct similarity checks or other relevant forms of scrutiny as part of the editorial process. The results of such checks may be taken into account during the editorial process, in accordance with the journal's Plagiarism Policy and Publication Ethics.

4. Statement on AI Use in the Manuscript

If AI is used substantially in the manuscript preparation process, the author must include a disclosure statement regarding AI usage in the appropriate section of the manuscript. This disclosure must transparently explain the purpose and nature of the AI's application during the writing or development of the manuscript.

Example 1 – Use for Language Editing

AI Usage Statement : The author used [AI name/tool] to a limited extent as an aid for language editing, grammar checking, and refining sentence structure. All scientific content, data interpretation, verification processes, and final decisions regarding the manuscript's content were fully conducted, reviewed, and approved by the author.

Example 2 – Use in Manuscript Preparation

AI Usage Statement : During the preparation of this manuscript, [AI name/tool] was utilized to assist in developing the initial draft and refining specific sections of the text. The author is responsible for critically reviewing, verifying, correcting, editing, and approving all material generated or assisted by AI. Full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and scientific integrity of the manuscript rests with the author.

Example 3 – Use for Analysis or Image Generation

AI Usage Statement : [AI name/tool] was used as an aid for [describe the specific nature of the use]. All AI outputs have been independently reviewed and verified by the author. The author retains full responsibility for the accuracy, validity, correctness of interpretation, and integrity of the analysis or images produced with AI assistance.

AI usage limited to spell-checking, grammar checking, or basic language refinement may be considered a form of minor editing assistance and does not always require specific disclosure. However, if the use of AI contributes to the creation, development, modification, interpretation, or alteration of the scientific substance of the manuscript, such use must be transparently disclosed. Such disclosure does not absolve the author of scientific responsibility, as the author remains fully responsible for the entire content of the manuscript submitted to Pharmacoscientia.

5. AI Usage Policy for Reviewers

Pharmacoscientia Journal employs a double-blind peer review system to maintain objectivity, independence, and confidentiality throughout the review process. Manuscripts submitted to the journal constitute privileged scientific communications and must be treated as information intended solely for the editorial and peer review processes. Consequently, reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript, the authors' identities, research data, supporting materials, and all information obtained during the review process. This principle aligns with ICMJE recommendations regarding the reviewer's responsibility to safeguard the confidentiality of the manuscript and the information contained therein.

Reviewers are prohibited from uploading, copying, inputting, or processing any part or the entirety of a manuscript using AI systems where confidentiality cannot be guaranteed. This prohibition extends to the use of AI for summarizing the manuscript, evaluating its quality or scientific substance, generating review comments or recommendations, and drafting peer review reports. The use of AI to process manuscripts is permitted only if explicitly authorized by Pharmacoscientia and if there are adequate safeguards ensuring the confidentiality of the processed information. This provision adheres to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) principle requiring reviewers to comply with journal policies or obtain prior permission from the journal before utilizing AI to assist in the review process.

Reviewers remain solely responsible for all assessments, comments, recommendations, and decisions submitted to the editor. AI cannot replace the reviewer's scientific, ethical, and professional judgment. Reviewers must verify any AI-generated output used, as AI systems can produce information that is inaccurate, incomplete, biased, or misleading.

Permissible Use of AI by Reviewers

Reviewers may use AI to a limited extent as an assistive tool, provided they adhere to Pharmacoscientia Journal’s policies, maintain manuscript confidentiality, and do not delegate the responsibility for scientific assessment to AI. Permissible uses of AI include :

assisting in improving grammar, spelling, or language clarity in review comments that have already been drafted and evaluated by the reviewer;
helping to explain general terms or concepts that do not require the disclosure of the manuscript's content, data, identities, or confidential information;
assisting with administrative tasks that do not involve processing or disclosing manuscript content or confidential information;
other uses of AI that have been approved by the editor or the journal and can be carried out while ensuring information confidentiality.

In all such instances, the reviewer must still conduct the review and assessment independently. AI output must not be used as a substitute for critical reading, methodological assessment, interpretation of results, or the reviewer's professional judgment.

If a reviewer uses AI during the review process, such use must comply with Pharmacoscientia Journal’s policies. In accordance with the transparency principles of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), reviewers must also disclose the use of AI to the editor if required by journal policy or requested by the editor; this includes specifying the AI tool used and the purpose of its use.

Prohibited Use of AI

To protect the confidentiality, integrity, and independence of the peer review process, reviewers are prohibited from :

uploading or inputting all or part of a manuscript into an AI system if the confidentiality of data and information cannot be guaranteed; • using AI to generate the entire peer review report or to replace the reviewer's critical judgment; • delegating scientific evaluations, recommendations, or decisions to AI without human judgment and verification;
using AI to assess a manuscript without reading and evaluating the manuscript firsthand;
inputting research data, personal data, author identity information, unpublished material, or other confidential information into AI systems that lack adequate confidentiality protections;
using information or ideas obtained from the manuscript for personal gain, other research, other publications, or purposes outside the peer review process;
disclosing the author's identity, manuscript content, research data, reviewer comments, or other confidential information to unauthorized parties; or
using AI in a manner that creates a conflict of interest, compromises the reviewer's independence, or undermines the integrity of the peer review process.
Reviewer Responsibility Regarding AI Use

The use of AI does not transfer the reviewer's responsibility to the technology or the AI system provider. Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, relevance, objectivity, integrity, and confidentiality of all comments and recommendations submitted to the editor.

Reviewers are required to examine and validate any AI output before use. Reviewers must also ensure that the use of AI does not result in the disclosure of confidential information, copyright infringement, conflicts of interest, bias in assessment, or violations of the Pharmacoscientia Journal's publication ethics policies.

If AI is used in the review process without required authorization or results in a breach of confidentiality, the editor may take appropriate action in accordance with the Pharmacoscientia Journal's ethical policies and editorial procedures.

Transparency and Disclosure of AI Use

Reviewers utilizing AI during the peer review process must adhere to the disclosure requirements established by the Pharmacoscientia journal. Upon an editor's request, reviewers must provide information regarding :

the name or type of AI tool used;
the purpose of the AI usage;
the specific sections or stages of the review process involving AI; and
the steps taken by the reviewer to verify and validate the AI-generated output.

Disclosing the use of AI does not absolve the reviewer of the obligation to maintain manuscript confidentiality. Information regarding AI usage must be communicated to the editor via the journal's designated channels and must not be included in any report that could reveal the reviewer's identity to the author within a double-blind peer review system.

This policy aims to ensure that the use of AI in the peer review process upholds the principles of confidentiality, transparency, accountability, independence, scientific integrity, and human oversight, as emphasized in the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the principles of scientific publication ethics.

6. AI Policy for Editors and the Editorial Board

Editors and the Editorial Board of the Pharmacoscientia Journal may utilize Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology in a limited capacity to support administrative and editorial activities. Such usage may include grammar and language checks, manuscript formatting verification, administrative support, the identification of technical issues within manuscripts, and other supporting tasks, provided that AI does not replace the editor's professional functions, judgment, and responsibilities.

Although AI may serve as an assistive tool, all editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the authorized editor. This encompasses assessing manuscript suitability, selecting reviewers, evaluating and interpreting review findings, and issuing editorial decisions—namely Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Similarly, the handling of and decision-making regarding alleged publication ethics violations must be based on the editor's judgment and established editorial procedures, rather than being delegated to an AI system.

Editors are not permitted to delegate final editorial decisions to AI. Any output generated or assisted by AI must be critically reviewed and verified by the editor to ensure accuracy, relevance, and validity before being utilized in the editorial process.

In accordance with the principles set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), editors remain accountable for the accuracy and validity of material produced with AI assistance. Therefore, the use of AI in the editorial process must be conducted transparently and responsibly, in adherence to the journal's clear internal policies, while maintaining human judgment and decision-making as the primary basis for editorial management.

7.Confidentiality in the Double-Blind Peer Review Process

The Pharmacoscientia Journal employs a double-blind peer review system that requires the confidentiality of all information regarding manuscripts and the identities of parties involved in the review process to be maintained. Therefore, the use of AI technology in the editorial process must adhere to principles regarding identity protection, data security, and information confidentiality.

Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff are prohibited from inputting confidential information into AI platforms or systems that cannot guarantee an adequate level of security and data protection. Such information includes, but is not limited to :

unpublished manuscripts;
authors' names, identities, and personal information;
authors' addresses, institutions, or affiliations;
reviewers' identities;
reviewers' reports and findings;
editors' comments, notes, or recommendations;
unpublished research data or findings;
respondents' personal information or identifying data;
correspondence between authors, reviewers, and editors; and
other confidential information obtained during the editorial process.

The obligation to maintain confidentiality is an integral part of the responsibilities held by editors, reviewers, and editorial staff during the *Pharmacoscientia* peer review process. Information contained in manuscripts undergoing review must be treated as confidential and must not be used, disseminated, or exploited for purposes outside the editorial process. This principle aligns with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which emphasize that manuscripts under review constitute confidential information that must be protected by all parties involved in the review process.

8. Use of AI in Plagiarism Checks

Pharmacoscientia Journal may utilize similarity detection software and technologies based on algorithms or artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in assessing text similarity and upholding the integrity and originality of manuscripts. The use of such technology is intended to support the screening process rather than replace editorial judgment.

Analysis results generated by similarity tools or AI-based systems cannot serve as the sole basis for determining that a manuscript contains plagiarism. Editors must conduct a comprehensive evaluation by considering various aspects, including :

the context and relevance of the identified text similarity;
the source or publication linked to the similarity;
the accuracy of quotations, citations, and source attribution;
sections of the article that typically employ standard phrasing or methodologies;
the extent, pattern, and distribution of similarity within the manuscript;
the possibility of self-plagiarism or the reuse of the author's own work without appropriate disclosure; and
clarifications or explanations from the author, if necessary.

Therefore, AI-based technologies and similarity checking tools serve only as supporting instruments in the evaluation process. Determinations regarding suspected plagiarism remain the responsibility of the editor and must be based on human review, available evidence, and the standards of academic integrity and publication ethics applicable to Pharmacoscientia Journal.

9. Use of AI in Image Creation or Manipulation

The use of AI technology to generate, process, or modify images in a scientific manuscript must be disclosed if such use could affect the substance, authenticity, or interpretation of the scientific information presented. AI must not be used to alter or fabricate scientific evidence, including :

generating experimental data or images for experiments that were never actually conducted;
deleting, concealing, or omitting data that do not align with expected results;
modifying research results in a manner that could lead to erroneous or misleading interpretations;
generating fictitious microscopic images, laboratory imagery, or representations of research results;
manipulating graphs, diagrams, or data visualizations to provide undue support for specific hypotheses or conclusions; and
creating or altering visual material to convey the impression that it represents actual documentation or the results of experiments that were genuinely performed.

If AI is used as an aid in the creation, processing, editing, or visualization of images, such use must be transparent and adequately explained in the manuscript, in accordance with the context of its application as well as applicable principles of integrity and scientific reporting standards. Responsibility for the accuracy, authenticity, and integrity of all visual material remains with the author.

10. AI and Scientific References

The use of AI is not intended to replace the process of searching for and verifying primary scientific sources. Authors remain responsible for searching relevant scientific literature and ensuring the validity of any references generated, discovered, or recommended by AI before including them in the manuscript.

References obtained with the assistance of AI must be thoroughly verified. References must not be included in the manuscript if they :

cannot be verified or located in legitimate scientific sources;
contain invalid or unverifiable DOIs;
exhibit discrepancies regarding the title, author names, journal, or other bibliographic information;
fail to provide adequate support for the scientific statements or claims being referenced; or
are erroneous references or "hallucinations" generated by the AI system.

AI should not be used as the primary source to support a scientific claim when the original scientific source or a relevant primary source is available. The authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, relevance, and validity of all references included in the manuscript.

11. Disclosure of AI Use Upon Manuscript Submission

When submitting a manuscript to Pharmacoscientia Journal, authors are required to transparently disclose whether artificial intelligence (AI) technology including generative AI was used during the manuscript's drafting or editing process. If AI was not used, authors may include the following statement:

AI Use Statement: The authors declare that neither generative AI nor AI-based technology was used in the drafting process of this manuscript.

If AI was used during the manuscript preparation process, authors must specify the name of the AI tool or technology employed and the purpose of its use. The following statement may be used:

AI Use Statement: The authors declare that [name of AI/tool] was used for [describe the purpose of use]. All output generated with the assistance of AI has been independently reviewed, checked, and verified by the authors. The authors retain full responsibility for the content, accuracy, originality, and integrity of the submitted manuscript.

Disclosure of AI use may be included in the cover letter and/or the manuscript itself, depending on the type, extent, and purpose of the technology's application. This disclosure aims to ensure transparency in the manuscript preparation process and to guarantee that the use of AI does not replace the authors' scientific judgment and responsibility. This requirement aligns with the transparency principles outlined in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations regarding the use and disclosure of AI technology in scientific publications.

12. Non-disclosure or Dishonesty Regarding AI Usage

If an editor discovers material use of AI that was not declared by the author, the editor may request an explanation regarding the use of said technology. If the AI usage relates to a suspected breach of scientific integrity including plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, breach of confidentiality, or other forms of publication ethics violations Pharmacoscientia

Journal may take action in accordance with its publication ethics policies and established procedures for handling ethical violations.

Actions that may be taken include:

requesting clarification or an explanation from the author;
requiring the author to revise the manuscript or provide an adequate disclosure of AI usage;
suspending the editorial process until the issue is resolved;
rejecting the manuscript;
publishing a correction for an already published article; or
taking other actions proportionate to the nature, severity, and impact of the violation, in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policy.

Undisclosed AI usage is not automatically categorized as misconduct. Assessments of suspected violations are conducted on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the type of AI usage, the extent of AI involvement, the purpose of its use, and its impact on the manuscript's originality, accuracy, transparency, and integrity.

13. Responsibilities of the Parties

Authors

Authors bear full responsibility for the manuscript submitted to Pharmacoscientia, including :

guaranteeing the authenticity and originality of the manuscript;
ensuring the accuracy and reliability of all information presented;
guaranteeing the validity, integrity, and traceability of research data;
ensuring that all references used are accurate, relevant, and verifiable;
ensuring that the manuscript contains no plagiarism or other forms of academic integrity violations;
adhering to all journal regulations and policies regarding publication ethics and plagiarism;
disclosing the use of artificial intelligence (AI) or AI-based technologies in accordance with journal guidelines; and
assuming full responsibility for all content, statements, data, interpretations, and conclusions contained in the manuscript.

Reviewer

Reviewers are responsible for :

maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscript and all information obtained during the review process;
providing an objective, independent, scientifically grounded, and constructive evaluation;
disclosing potential conflicts of interest and declining the review assignment if a conflict exists that could affect the objectivity of the assessment;
refraining from using, disseminating, or exploiting information or data contained in the manuscript for personal gain or the benefit of others;
using AI or AI-based technology only when permitted by the journal's policy and while maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscript; and
taking responsibility for the substance of the comments, feedback, and recommendations provided during the peer review process.

Editor

The editor is responsible for :

maintaining the confidentiality of information obtained during the editorial and peer review processes;
ensuring that the review and editorial decision-making processes are fair, independent, transparent, and in accordance with publication ethics standards;
ensuring that the use of AI in the editorial process is limited, responsible, and compliant with the journal's policies;
safeguarding the integrity, independence, and credibility of the entire publication process;
addressing allegations of publication ethics violations appropriately, proportionately, and in accordance with established procedures; and
making editorial decisions based on human judgment, assessment, and responsibility, and not delegating editorial decisions to automated AI systems.

AI Policy

sidebar

Language

Information