AI Usage & Disclosure Policy

General Principles of AI Usage: In accordance with COPE Core Practices on Integrity, Confidentiality, Transparency, and Editorial Oversight, HJBHS affirms that:

  • Responsibility and accountability for all published content rest solely with human authors, editors, and reviewers.
  • Generative AI tools cannot be authors, cannot take responsibility for scholarly work, and cannot be held accountable for ethical conduct.
  • Any permitted use of AI must be transparent and fully disclosed.
  • Manuscripts, peer-review materials, and editorial communications are confidential intellectual property and must not be shared with third-party AI systems.
  • Editorial and peer-review decisions must be based on human expertise, independent judgment, and ethical reasoning.
  • AI technologies may be used only when they do not compromise research integrity, originality, data protection, or ethical publishing standards.

AI Policy for Editors

In line with COPE Core Practices on Editorial Oversight and Independence:

  • Editorial Responsibility: Editors are accountable for safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. Editorial decisions must not be delegated to, generated by, or influenced by generative AI systems.
  • Prohibited Use of AI: Editors must not upload, input, or process any confidential material into generative AI tools, including:
    • Manuscript text and supplementary files
    • Peer-review reports
    • Editorial correspondence and internal deliberations
  • Such use constitutes a breach of confidentiality under COPE standards.
  • Editorial Evaluation: AI tools must not be used to assess scientific merit, methodological quality, clinical relevance, originality, or ethical compliance, nor to generate editorial recommendations or summaries.
  • Approved Systems: Secure, publisher-approved tools may be used only for limited administrative or integrity-supporting purposes (e.g., plagiarism detection), under controlled conditions with human oversight.
  • Oversight of Author AI Disclosures: Editors must ensure that declared AI use by authors is transparently reported. Manuscripts are evaluated on scientific rigor and ethical compliance, not on the presence of AI-assisted language editing. Suspected breaches of AI disclosure or misuse will be handled in accordance with COPE flowcharts for suspected misconduct.

AI Policy for Reviewers

Consistent with COPE Core Practices on Confidentiality, Objectivity, and Ethical Review:

  • Reviewer Responsibility: Peer review must be conducted exclusively by the invited reviewer. Reviews must reflect the reviewer’s independent expert judgment.
  • Confidentiality and AI Restrictions: Reviewers must not upload, share, or process any manuscript content using generative AI tools, including abstracts, figures, tables, methods, or supplementary materials. Confidentiality obligations apply indefinitely, regardless of editorial outcome.
  • Preparation of Review Reports: Peer-review reports must be written entirely by reviewers without AI assistance for drafting, paraphrasing, editing, or language enhancement. Reviewers remain fully accountable for the content and tone of their reports.
  • Scientific Judgment: AI tools must not be used to generate, influence, or validate scientific opinions, recommendations, or ethical assessments.
  • Concerns Regarding Author AI Use: Suspected undisclosed or inappropriate AI use by authors should be reported confidentially to the handling editor. Reviewers must not attempt verification using AI tools.
  • Compliance: Failure to comply with this policy may result in removal from the reviewer database and further action consistent with COPE guidance.

AI Policy for Authors

In alignment with COPE and ICMJE principles of Accountability, Transparency, and Research Integrity:

  • Accountability and Disclosure: Authors are fully responsible for all content submitted for publication, including any AI-assisted material. Any permitted AI use must be disclosed in a dedicated statement placed before the References section.
  • AI-Assisted Writing and Language Editing: Authors may use AI tools solely for grammar, spelling, and language clarity, provided that:
    • AI use is explicitly disclosed
    • All AI-assisted content is critically reviewed and approved by the authors
    • Authors retain full responsibility for accuracy, originality, and integrity
    • AI tools must not be used to generate scientific content, clinical interpretations, results, or conclusions without appropriate human oversight.
  • Authorship: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or contributors. Authorship requires intellectual contribution, accountability, and the ability to respond to questions regarding the work, consistent with ICMJE criteria.
  • Images, Figures, and Visual Data: The use of generative AI to create, alter, enhance, or fabricate images, figures, or visual data is strictly prohibited. Only minimal, non-deceptive adjustments (e.g., brightness or contrast correction) are permitted. Any manipulation that alters data representation constitutes misconduct under COPE standards.
  • AI in Research Methods: AI tools integral to study design or analysis (e.g., machine learning models, motion analysis systems, biomedical, and health sciences analytics) are permitted. Authors must provide full methodological transparency, including software versions, model parameters, data sources, and validation procedures.
  • Verification and Editorial Review: The journal may request raw data, original images, or technical documentation to verify compliance with this policy. AI-generated graphical abstracts or visual summaries require prior written editorial approval.
  • Policy Enforcement: Noncompliance may result in rejection, correction, retraction, or other actions consistent with COPE Core Practices and flowcharts. Authors are encouraged to seek clarification from the editorial office before submission when uncertainty exists.