- AI technology has the potential to enhance medical publishing by increasing efficiency and predicting which papers will have the most impact.
As generative artificial intelligence (AI) models like ChatGPT and BioGPT become more widely used, some in medical publishing have raised concerns about shortfalls, while others are beginning to champion the potential utility of AI. In a recent article for The Scholarly Kitchen, Emma Watkins looked at how the medical publishing community could begin to use AI to its advantage.
Watkins identifies various aspects of the article review process that could be made more efficient through the addition of AI, helping to decrease publication lead times while ensuring research integrity is maintained. She suggests that AI could be used to:
- select appropriate peer reviewers
- assess submissions to journals based on relevance
- suggest alternative journals when a submission is not accepted
- and even detect fraudulent AI-generated content.
Additionally, Watkins proposes a role for AI in automatic generation of certain types of content, for example lay summaries of otherwise complex research papers.
Making intelligent predictions
Watkins also explores the ways in which machine learning could be used to predict trends in medical publishing. As discussed in a recent paper in Nature Biotechnology by researchers at MIT, AI can be trained on previous scientific publications and used to predict which new papers will be the most impactful. Being able to identify high-impact papers early would allow publishers to direct resources to publicising these articles, although Watkins cautions against a cycle that could then miss truly innovative papers.
Currently, it seems unlikely that publishing decisions will ever rely solely on AI without human input. However, if harnessed correctly, AI could be used to improve certain aspects of medical publishing. The challenge for publishers, Watkins highlights, “is to ensure they are the creative adopters leading the charge”.
If harnessed correctly, AI could be used to improve certain aspects of medical publishing. The challenge for publishers, Watkins highlights, “is to ensure they are the creative adopters leading the charge”.