'Most Top Medical Journals Prohibit Use of AI During Peer Review Process'

 Most of the top 100 medical journals provide guidance on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) during the peer review process, with many explicitly prohibiting its use, a study showed.

Of the 78 top journals that provide this guidance, 59% prohibit its use in peer review, while the rest allow its use if confidentiality is maintained and authorship rights are respected, reported Jian-Ping Liu, PhD, of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, and co-authors.

In addition, 91% of the journals prohibited the uploading of content related to manuscripts to AI, and 32% allowed for restricted use of AI that mandated reviewers disclose in review reports, they noted in their research letter in JAMA Network Openopens in a new tab or window.

In their introduction, Liu and colleagues pointed out that "the rapid growth of medical research publishing and preprint servers appears to be straining the peer review process, potentially causing a shortage of qualified reviewers and slower reviews."

"Innovative solutions are urgently needed," they added. "Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, particularly generative AI (GenAI), offer potential for enhancing peer review, but its integration into this workflow varies by journal policy."

Co-author Zhi-Qiang Li, MPH, PhD, also of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, told MedPage Today that "it was striking to discover that, despite AI's potential to augment the efficiency of peer review, a substantial 91% of journals have prohibited the submission of manuscript-related content to AI. This underscores a heightened awareness for safeguarding the confidentiality and integrity of manuscripts."

He noted that there was considerable divergence among different journals' AI policies, with many identifying a few primary reasons for choosing to limit the use of AI, including the desire to protect manuscript confidentiality; concerns about the introduction of incorrect, incomplete, or biased information by AI; and the potential for violating data privacy rights.

"This study indicates that the impact of AI on the scientific publishing process and medical research is a double-edged sword," Li said. "On one hand, AI has the potential to enhance the efficiency of peer review, but on the other hand, it raises concerns about biases and confidentiality breaches."

"The varying stances of journals towards AI use may significantly influence the decisions of researchers when drafting and submitting their papers," he added.

For this study, the authors used data from Scimago.org for the top 100 medical journals to determine the existence and nature of their AI guidance during peer review. They searched the journals' websites for AI-related policies on June 30 and August 10. If a journal did not have its own AI guidance but linked to its publisher's guidance, the authors used that guidance for the analysis.

Of the 78 journals, 41% linked to their publisher's website that had preferences for AI use. Wiley and Springer Nature favored limited use of AI, while Elsevier and Cell Press prohibited any AI use during peer review.

Notably, 22% of journals also provided links to statements from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors or the World Association of Medical Editors, which allowed for limited use of AI. However, the authors noted that five of those journals had specific guidance that contradicted the statements of those organizations.

Liu and colleagues said that they only considered the policies of the top 100 medical journals, which could have missed other trends or attitudes in lower-ranked journals' policies. They also noted that relying on shared publisher guidance as a proxy for all journals could have overestimated the number with specific guidance on AI.

Disclosures

The study was funded by grants from the National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

The authors reported no conflicts of interest.

Primary Source

JAMA Network Open

Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowLi ZQ, et al "Use of artificial intelligence in peer review among top 100 medical journals" JAMA Netw Open 2024; DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48609.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/practicemanagement/informationtechnology/113200

House education chair demands Biden admin nix ‘blatantly illegal’ latest student loan scheme

 House Education Committee Chairwoman Virginia Foxx is ripping the outgoing Biden administration’s latest proposed student loan forgiveness scheme as “blatantly illegal” and demanding the federal Department of Education nix it.

Just before last month’s election, the Department of Education announced it was launching yet another attempt to get through President Biden’s hotly controversial plan despite numerous court slap-downs in the past.

The latest machination would again offer to broadly wipe out student loans based on hardship, including those thought to have an “80% chance of being in default within the next two years.”

“This fourth scheme is just as legally dubious as the prior Biden-Harris administration attempts to
‘cancel’ student loan borrowers’ debts, but have the American taxpayer pick up the tab,” Foxx wrote to DOE Secretary Miguel Cardona in a Monday letter exclusively obtained by The Post.

3

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has ripped the Education Department’s latest student loan forgiveness plan as “illegal.”AP

Throughout his administration, Biden has pushed hard to use executive action to cancel student loans en masse. The first effort involved the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students (HEROES) Act, which was scuttled by the US Supreme Court.

Since then, the administration has made various other attempts, including through its SAVE Plan, which was predicated on income-driven repayment and also has been stymied in the courts.

Under the most recent proposal, the administration would wipe out loans for individuals it believes have an 80% chance of defaulting by using a “predictive assessment using existing borrower data.”

“Congress has not written any enabling legislation to provide the Department the power to use artificial intelligence or a subjective application process to hear borrower stories of hardship and determine whose loans to cancel,” Foxx wrote in her letter to Cardona.

3

President Biden’s administration has looked for legal avenues to forgive student loans en masse.Aaron Schwartz/POOL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

The Biden administration estimated that, if finalized, the latest proposal “would authorize loan forgiveness for approximately 8 million borrowers experiencing hardship.”

Foxx, 81, said that while the Education Department estimates the proposal’s price tag is just over $100 billion, other estimates “show the true amount could be eight times higher.”

Her letter comes as the public notice and comment period on the plan wraps up. The Department of Education previously indicated it would work to finalize the regulations behind the latest plan next year.

Foxx contended the Education Department is trying to be the arbiter of “subjective life circumstances” and insinuated that the rationale behind that proposal could lead to broader forgiveness.

“It would effectively give the Secretary direct control over the $1.7 trillion student loan portfolio and the ability to forgive any and all of the loans in it,” she bemoaned.

Foxx stressed that about 87% of Americans either never attended college or paid off their loans and would be on the hook for the forgiveness plan as taxpayers.

“This latest scheme is merely a Band-Aid that forces taxpayers to shoulder the responsibility of paying off someone else’s debt,” she wrote.

“Taken together, the Department has attempted to spend more on loan ‘forgiveness’ than the federal government will spend helping families afford college through the Pell Grant over the next decade.”

3

Federal Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has championed efforts to wipe out student loans.AP

Instead of student loan forgiveness, she argued that the department should be focused more on trying to lower college costs and its revamp of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, which was bogged by delays and other issues.

Biden, 82, seemingly pushed for student loan forgiveness in a bid to woo younger voters and excite progressives while running for re-election.

President-elect Donald Trump has opposed the sweeping student loan plans pushed by his successor and soon-to-be predecessor and has called for eliminating the Department of Education altogether.

The DOE did not respond to a Post request for comment.

https://nypost.com/2024/12/03/us-news/rep-virginia-foxx-demands-biden-admin-nix-blatantly-illegal-latest-student-loan-scheme/

Tren de Aragua gangster Jose Ibarra asks for new trial after Laken Riley murder conviction

 The violent Tren de Aragua gangbanger who brutally murdered Georgia nursing student Laken Riley has asked a judge for a new trial after he was sentenced to life in prison last month for the crime which shocked the nation.

Lawyers for Jose Ibarra, an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, submitted a two-page court filing Tuesday asking Judge H. Patrick Haggard to set aside the verdict and penalty he decided during the bench trial.

3

Venezuelan gang member Jose Ibarra asks for new trial after he was convicted last month of murdering Laken Riley.Robin Rayne for Fox News Digital/POOL

Haggard’s decision was “contrary to law” and “to the evidence” and the judge “committed other errors of law that necessitate a new trial,” the filing alleges.

The court papers don’t elaborate further but do ask the judge to leave the door open for the defense to “review the facts and circumstances” at trial in order to potentially flesh the request out further at a later date.

3

Laken Riley was a promising nursing student in Athens, Georgia when Ibarra allegedly murdered her.Allyson Phillips/Facebook
The motion for a new trial is a necessary first step for the defense team to take before they can file an appeal.

On Nov. 20, Haggard convicted Ibarra of all 10 counts he faced, including counts of murder, malice murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, aggravated assault with intent to rape and Peeping Tom charges.

Over the course of a four-day trial — featuring 29 prosecution witnesses and just three defense witnesses — prosecutors argued that Ibarra, 26, brutally beat and asphyxiated Riley, 22, on Feb. 22 while she was out jogging near the University of Georgia campus in Athens.

3

The emotional murder trial ended after four days and was decided by a judge, rather than a jury.AP

Riley — who’d recently transferred from the University of Georgia to Augusta University to study nursing — allegedly fought for her life for roughly 18 minutes against her killer, whom prosecutors said was planning to sexually assault her but for the fierce fight she put up.

Ibarra’s fingerprint was found on Riley’s phone and his DNA was under her fingernails, prosecutors say the evidence showed.

But Ibarra’s lawyers said the fingerprint and DNA evidence analysis was unreliable and tried to pin the murder on Ibarra’s brother, Diego Ibarra, claiming Jose’s body didn’t match the one seen on surveillance footage.

https://nypost.com/2024/12/03/us-news/jose-ibarra-asks-for-new-trial-after-laken-riley-murder-conviction/