Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Our Dermatology Online recognises the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI, and automated tools in scholarly research and publishing.

The journal permits responsible use of AI and automated tools, provided that their use does not compromise the accuracy, originality, confidentiality, transparency, or integrity of scholarly work.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and other contributors remain responsible for their work and for complying with the journal’s editorial and publication-ethics policies.

1. Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use generative AI and other automated tools to assist with manuscript preparation, provided that the authors remain fully responsible for the submitted content.

Examples of permitted uses may include:

  • language improvement;
  • grammar and spelling correction;
  • translation;
  • formatting assistance;
  • improving clarity and readability;
  • assistance with coding or data-processing tasks, where the resulting work is independently verified by the authors.

The use of AI tools must not replace the authors’ intellectual responsibility for the manuscript.

Authors must carefully review and verify any content produced or modified with the assistance of AI.

Authors remain responsible for:

  • the accuracy of the manuscript;
  • the originality of the work;
  • the validity of references and citations;
  • the integrity of data and results;
  • compliance with research-ethics requirements;
  • disclosure of relevant conflicts of interest;
  • compliance with copyright and licensing requirements.
2. Disclosure of Generative AI Use

Authors should disclose the use of generative AI or other automated tools when such use goes beyond straightforward language correction, editing, translation, or formatting.

Disclosure should identify:

  • the AI or automated tool used;
  • the purpose for which it was used;
  • the relevant part of the manuscript or research process, where applicable.

The disclosure should be included in the manuscript in an appropriate section, such as an acknowledgements or AI-use statement.

For example:

AI Use Statement: During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of tool] for [describe purpose]. The authors reviewed and verified the resulting content and take full responsibility for the final published work.

Routine use of standard spelling, grammar, formatting, or similar editing tools does not normally require a separate disclosure.

3. AI Cannot Be an Author

AI systems, generative AI tools, large language models, chatbots, or other automated systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript.

Authorship requires human responsibility for the work.

Authors remain responsible for all content submitted to the journal, including content generated or modified with the assistance of AI.

4. AI-Generated References and Citations

Authors must verify all references and citations generated or suggested by AI tools.

AI systems may generate inaccurate, incomplete, or nonexistent references.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that every cited source:

  • actually exists;
  • supports the statement for which it is cited;
  • is accurately represented;
  • is appropriately cited.

Generative AI tools should not be cited as a scholarly source where a primary or authoritative source is available.

5. AI and Research Data

AI tools may be used in research only where their use is scientifically appropriate and complies with applicable ethical, legal, privacy, and confidentiality requirements.

Authors remain responsible for verifying AI-assisted analyses, classifications, predictions, translations, coding, or other research outputs.

AI-generated or AI-assisted results must not be presented as independently validated findings unless they have been appropriately evaluated.

6. Confidentiality and Patient Information

Authors must not submit confidential, personally identifiable, or protected information to an external AI system unless they have the legal and ethical authority to do so and the use is consistent with applicable privacy requirements.

Particular care must be taken with:

  • patient information;
  • clinical photographs;
  • identifiable case information;
  • unpublished research data;
  • confidential correspondence;
  • proprietary information.

The use of an AI tool does not remove the author’s responsibility to obtain appropriate patient consent or ethical approval where required.

7. AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.

Reviewers should not upload manuscripts, unpublished manuscript content, confidential data, figures, tables, reviewer reports, or other confidential material to generative AI systems for the purpose of generating a peer-review report.

AI tools must not be used to replace the reviewer’s independent scholarly assessment.

Reviewers remain responsible for the confidentiality, accuracy, fairness, and integrity of their peer-review reports.

If a reviewer uses an AI or automated tool for limited language editing of their own review, the reviewer remains responsible for the final report and must ensure that confidential manuscript information is not disclosed to an unauthorised external system.

8. AI Use by Editors

Editors must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and editorial correspondence.

Editors should not use generative AI systems to generate substantive editorial assessments or make editorial decisions on manuscripts.

Editorial decisions must remain under human control and be based on appropriate scholarly and ethical considerations.

Editors may use appropriate automated tools for limited administrative, technical, similarity-screening, or research-integrity purposes where confidentiality, accuracy, and data protection can be maintained.

9. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

Our Dermatology Online uses Plagramme as a similarity and plagiarism-screening tool as part of the journal’s editorial assessment process.

Submitted manuscripts may be screened for:

  • textual similarity with previously published material;
  • possible plagiarism;
  • inappropriate text reuse;
  • inadequate or missing attribution;
  • substantial overlap with other publications.

The results of automated similarity screening are not considered conclusive evidence of plagiarism or research misconduct.

A similarity score may result from legitimate overlap, including commonly used scientific terminology, methodological descriptions, standard phrases, references, appropriately identified quotations, or other legitimate forms of textual overlap.

Similarity reports are therefore reviewed and interpreted by an editor or other appropriately designated member of the editorial team.

The journal does not make editorial decisions solely on the basis of an automated similarity score.

Where substantial or inappropriate overlap is identified, the journal may request clarification from the authors and may take further action in accordance with its publication-ethics policies.

10. AI-Generated Text Screening

Our Dermatology Online may use Plagramme as an additional screening tool to identify text that may have been generated or substantially modified using artificial intelligence.

AI-detection results are treated as an editorial screening signal only.

An automated AI-detection result is not considered definitive evidence that a manuscript was generated using AI.

AI-detection technologies may produce false positives and false negatives. Consequently, an AI-detection result alone will not normally constitute sufficient grounds for rejection of a manuscript or a finding of publication misconduct.

Where an AI-detection result raises a substantive concern, the editorial team may:

  • review the relevant portions of the manuscript;
  • compare the content with the authors’ disclosure;
  • request clarification from the authors;
  • request information concerning the preparation of the manuscript;
  • conduct additional editorial or integrity checks where appropriate.

Any substantive editorial action will be based on human assessment and the totality of the available evidence.

11. AI-Assisted Peer Review and Editorial Decisions

AI-generated recommendations must not replace independent human judgement.

The final decision concerning:

  • peer-review assessment;
  • manuscript acceptance or rejection;
  • requests for revision;
  • publication-ethics investigations;
  • corrections;
  • retractions;

remains the responsibility of the journal’s appropriately designated editor.

Automated screening tools may assist the editorial process, but their results do not determine editorial decisions independently.

12. AI-Generated Images and Figures

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI to create or substantially modify images, figures, illustrations, or other visual material when such use is relevant to the scientific or scholarly content of the manuscript.

AI-generated images must not misrepresent research data, clinical findings, experimental results, or other scientific evidence.

For clinical photographs and patient-related images, authors remain responsible for obtaining appropriate consent and protecting patient privacy.

The journal may reject AI-generated or AI-modified visual material when its use compromises the accuracy, authenticity, interpretation, or integrity of the scientific record.

13. Copyright and Intellectual Property

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content complies with applicable copyright and intellectual-property requirements.

The use of an AI tool does not automatically give authors permission to reproduce copyrighted material generated from or incorporated into the output.

Authors should ensure that the use of AI does not infringe the rights of third parties.

14. Transparency

The journal encourages transparency regarding substantive use of AI in scholarly publishing.

Failure to disclose a material use of generative AI may be considered during editorial assessment when the undisclosed use affects the interpretation, originality, integrity, or provenance of the manuscript.

The journal may request clarification from authors concerning the use of AI or automated tools where appropriate.

15. Responsibility of Authors

Regardless of whether AI tools are used, authors retain full responsibility for the submitted and published work.

AI assistance does not transfer responsibility for:

  • scientific accuracy;
  • originality;
  • research integrity;
  • ethical compliance;
  • patient confidentiality;
  • copyright;
  • references;
  • conclusions;
  • disclosure of conflicts of interest.
16. Policy Updates

The journal recognises that AI technologies and responsible-use standards are developing rapidly.

This policy may therefore be updated when appropriate to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, research ethics, technology, and recognised publication-ethics guidance.

The current version of this policy is available on the journal website.

Comments are closed.