BHTY Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Authors
Reviewers
Consequences
Publisher

Author Requirements

Requirements When Using AI

Full Disclosure and Documentation

All AI use must be explicitly declared in submissions through an AI Use Declaration Statement (required in all submissions):

Specific AI tools used (name, version, provider)
Exact purposes for which AI was employed
Date(s) of AI tool usage
Methods used to verify AI generated content
Statement of human oversight and final responsibility

Example Declaration:

“This research utilized ChatGPT-4.5 (OpenAI, accessed March 2025) for initial literature review organization and Claude 3 (Anthropic, accessed March 2025) for code commenting. All AI-generated content was independently verified against primary sources. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of all content, including any errors or omissions that may have originated from AI assistance.”

Bias Assessment and Ethical Review

Authors must demonstrate:

Active consideration of potential AI bias in healthcare contexts
Recognition of limitations in AI training data representation
Assessment of cultural, demographic, and clinical bias risks
Documentation of steps taken to mitigate identified biases
Acknowledgement of AI limitations in healthcare specific contexts
For more information on bias, reference: University of Oxford Catalog of Bias

3.Required Safeguards:

Use only AI tools with appropriate data handling certifications that you have evaluated and verified as a researcher
Implement local AI solutions (i.e. on your own server or computer) when processing sensitive data
Maintain audit trails of all AI interactions involving research data
Comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and other applicable privacy regulations
Obtain necessary institutional approvals for AI tool usage, including any relevant ethics or Investigation Review Board (IRB) approvals, before commencing.

4.Human Accountability and Verification

Author Responsibilities:

Personal review and verification of all AI generated content
Independent fact checking of all claims, statistics, and references
Critical evaluation of AI recommendations and outputs
Final approval and sign-off on all submitted content
Acceptance of full liability for errors, hallucinations/“false positives,” or inaccuracies

5.Human authors are expected to:

Absolutely ensure that any AI use in research or referencing does not lead to false references, use of references/citations that do not reflect the content of the original source, or similar AI-generated errors.

Independently validate all analyses, data interpretations, and figure generation

Confirm accuracy of technical implementations and code
Verify technical details and specifications

6.Prohibited Uses of AI for the Purposes of BHTY

The following activities are not permissible and may be interpreted as violations of research ethics and academic integrity:

Using AI to write substantial portions of a submission/manuscript without explicit declaration of this use
Submitting AI generated or AI-derived content that is not verified, g. references that do not exist, or references that do not reflect the cited material
Submitting AI-generated content as original work without human oversight/verification
Using AI for peer review activities or editorial decisions in lieu of careful human expert review and feedback
Generating fake data, references, or experimental results, including the generation of synthetic data for analysis without clear indication of AI use
Creating fabricated case studies or patient scenarios
Bypassing human oversight in critical analysis or conclusions
Plagiarism through undisclosed AI assistance
Fabrication of research findings using AI
Falsification of methodology descriptions
Misrepresentation of AI capabilities or limitations
Failure to disclose AI use when required

Editorial Review Process

The editorial team acknowledges that no “AI Detection” tools have been demonstrated to have a high level of validity. However, peer reviewers and authors are within their professional scope to question if AI has been used and request documentation of research processes, data, and methods if they have questions about the integrity of a submission’s methods, data, analysis, or writing.

To that end, reviewers and/or editors may:

Request additional documentation of research processes
Require raw data and methodology verification
Conduct enhanced review for AI assisted submissions
Reject submissions with inadequate AI disclosure

In addition, submissions declaring AI use will undergo:

Additional scrutiny of methodology and data analysis
Verification of bias mitigation strategies
Assessment of AI appropriateness for the specific research context and use
Evaluation of transparency and disclosure adequacy
Evaluation of appropriate ethics approval where required

Consequences of Policy Violations

The Editors and the publisher may apply any of the following measures, proportionate to the violation:

First Offense:

Manuscript rejection with opportunity for resubmission
Required completion of research integrity training
Enhanced scrutiny of future submissions

Repeated or Severe Violations:

Temporary or permanent publication ban with the journal and affiliated journals
Notification to author’s institutional research integrity office for severe violations
Immediate retraction of published articles if violations are discovered post-publication
Public correction or editorial expression of concern
Exclusion from editorial board participation or peer review activities

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Journal Promotion
The Publisher may use artificial intelligence platforms/tools, including chatbots, to assist with the preparation of journal marketing and promotional materials across various social media platforms. The use of such tools does not replace human oversight, creativity, or editorial judgment.