Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

MEV Policy on the Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

MEV recognizes the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI, and AI-assisted technologies in research and scholarly publishing. When used responsibly, these technologies may support research, manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial work. Their use, however, must preserve scientific integrity, originality, confidentiality, transparency, and human accountability.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and other persons involved in the publication process. It is guided by the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and internationally recognized good practices in scholarly publishing.

1. Scope and Definitions

For the purposes of this policy, “AI tools” include generative AI and AI-assisted technologies capable of generating or materially modifying text, code, images, audio, data, analysis, or other content. Examples include large language models, AI agents, deep-research tools, generative image systems, and AI-enabled analytical or visualization tools.

Routine tools used only for basic spelling, grammar, punctuation, formatting, or reference management are not considered substantive AI use under this policy, provided that they do not generate or materially alter scholarly content.

2. General Principles

The use of AI tools must comply with the following principles:

• Human authors, reviewers, and editors remain fully responsible and accountable for their respective contributions and decisions.

• AI tools must not replace human critical thinking, scientific judgment, interpretation, or intellectual contribution.

• Substantive use of AI must be disclosed transparently.

• AI-generated output must be critically reviewed and verified for accuracy, completeness, bias, originality, and appropriate attribution.

• Confidentiality, data privacy, informed consent, intellectual property rights, and publication rights must be protected.

• AI tools must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or conceal research data, results, images, citations, or other scholarly content.

3. Use of AI by Authors

3.1 AI-Assisted Manuscript Preparation

Authors may use AI tools in a supportive capacity during manuscript preparation. Appropriate uses may include:

• synthesizing literature as preparation for manuscript writing;

• identifying potential research gaps;

• organizing or structuring manuscript content;

• developing or refining ideas;

• checking manuscript completeness against relevant guidelines;

• improving language, clarity, readability, or translation; and

• assisting with reference organization or literature searches.

AI tools must not be used as a substitute for the authors’ own scientific analysis, interpretation, reasoning, or conclusions. Authors must not submit AI-generated sections without genuine intellectual contribution, critical evaluation, and substantial human revision.

Authors are responsible for independently verifying all factual claims, calculations, citations, and references suggested or generated by AI. Fabricated, nonexistent, inaccurate, or irrelevant references may constitute grounds for rejection.

Before entering unpublished manuscripts, research data, personal information, or other protected material into an AI tool, authors must review the tool’s terms of use and privacy practices. Authors must ensure that the tool provides adequate protection for confidentiality, intellectual property, data privacy, and future publication rights.

3.2 Disclosure of AI Use in Manuscript Preparation

Substantive use of AI tools in manuscript preparation must be disclosed in a separate section placed immediately before the References and titled:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Manuscript Preparation Process

The declaration must identify:

• the name of the tool or service;

• the version, where available;

• the purpose for which it was used;

• the extent of human review and revision; and

• the authors’ acceptance of full responsibility for the final content.

Authors may use the following format:

“While preparing this manuscript, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL/SERVICE, VERSION, AND PROVIDER] for [PURPOSE]. The author(s) critically reviewed, verified, and revised the resulting output and take full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and content of the published article.”

Use limited to basic spelling, grammar, punctuation, or conventional reference-management functions does not require disclosure. However, AI-assisted translation or any substantive alteration of sentence structure, organization, argumentation, references, or content must be disclosed.

When no substantive AI tool has been used in manuscript preparation, an AI declaration is not required.

3.3 AI Contributions and Authorship

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of a scholarly work, approve the final manuscript, manage conflicts of interest, or respond to questions arising after publication.

AI tools must not be cited as authors. Human authors remain collectively responsible for the originality, validity, ethical compliance, and integrity of the entire work, including any content developed with AI assistance.

4. Use of AI in Research Design and Methods

This policy does not prohibit the use of AI, machine learning, generative AI, or AI-assisted technologies as part of legitimate research design or research methods.

When AI is used for study design, code development, data collection, data processing, modeling, analysis, interpretation, or other research activities, its use must be described in the Methods section in sufficient detail to support transparency and reproducibility.

The description should include, where relevant:

• the name of the model, software, or tool;

• the version and developer or provider;

• the purpose and manner of use;

• the data inputs and outputs;

• the training data or data sources, when relevant and available;

• the parameters, prompts, or procedures necessary to understand or reproduce the process;

• the validation procedures; and

• the extent of human oversight.

AI-assisted code remains subject to the same standards of validity, documentation, reproducibility, and availability as code developed without AI assistance.

5. Figures, Images, and Artwork

The permitted use of AI depends on the purpose and evidentiary status of the image.

5.1 Explanatory Images

AI tools may be used to support the creation of explanatory images that illustrate concepts, processes, or relationships, including flowcharts, decision trees, timelines, conceptual diagrams, schematic illustrations, and experimental workflow diagrams.

Authors must verify the scientific accuracy, originality, and completeness of each image and ensure that it reflects their own ideas and interpretation.

AI use must be disclosed:

• in the general AI declaration; and

• in the caption of each relevant image, including the name and version of the tool and how it was used.

An appropriate caption may state:

“Initial schematic generated with [NAME AND VERSION OF TOOL] and subsequently reviewed, revised, and verified by the authors.”

5.2 Data Visualizations

AI tools may support the creation of plots, charts, graphs, heatmaps, and other data visualizations only when the resulting visualization is directly and faithfully derived from the underlying research data.

The analytical, computational, or statistical workflow must be reproducible and clearly described in the Methods section. Authors must identify the AI tool, version, provider, purpose, and validation procedure.

AI tools must not be used to invent or alter underlying data, fabricate results, or generate visualizations that are not supported by the reported data and methods. Authors may be required to provide underlying data, code, documentation, and original visualization files for editorial assessment.

5.3 Primary Research Images

AI tools must not be used to create or alter images that represent primary observed or experimental data, including microscopy images, histology images, gels, radiology scans, patient images, instrument outputs, or comparable research evidence.

AI tools must not be used to enhance, obscure, move, remove, replace, or introduce specific features in a primary research image.

Basic adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance may be made only using established image-processing software. Such adjustments must not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information and should be applied consistently to the entire image where appropriate.

This restriction does not prohibit AI-assisted imaging that forms a legitimate part of the research design or methods, such as image reconstruction, classification, segmentation, detection, or interpretation. Such use must be scientifically justified, reproducible, and fully described in the Methods section. Authors may be required to provide original, unprocessed images for editorial assessment.

5.4 Graphical Abstracts

General-purpose generative AI image tools must not be used to create graphical abstracts.

Dedicated scientific illustration or professional design tools may be used, provided that their licensing terms permit scholarly publication. Authors remain responsible for scientific accuracy, originality, proper attribution, and clearance of all intellectual property rights. Any substantive AI-enabled feature used within such a tool must be disclosed in the graphical abstract caption.

5.5 Cover Art

AI-generated cover art may be considered only with prior written permission from the MEV Editor-in-Chief and the publisher. Authors must demonstrate that all necessary rights and permissions have been obtained and must provide appropriate attribution.

AI-generated images must not reproduce or imitate protected artwork, identifiable persons, voices, products, trademarks, or copyrighted material without lawful authorization.

6. Use of AI by Reviewers

Submitted manuscripts and related editorial communications are confidential. Reviewers must not upload a manuscript, manuscript excerpt, figure, table, supplementary file, reviewer questionnaire, editorial correspondence, or any confidential information derived from a submission into an external AI tool.

AI tools cannot replace a reviewer’s independent scientific assessment, critical reasoning, or recommendation. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, originality, and content of their review reports.

AI tools may be used only in a limited supportive capacity, such as:

• conducting a general background literature search; or

• improving the language or structure of reviewer-authored text.

Such use is permitted only when no confidential manuscript information is entered and when the tool does not retain, reuse, share, or learn from the submitted content. Reviewers must verify the tool’s privacy policy and terms of service and must not assume that a tool is private merely because it is described as secure, paid, or enterprise-based.

Substantive AI use must be disclosed in the review report. Reviewers may use the following format:

“In preparing this review report, I used [NAME OF TOOL/SERVICE] for [PURPOSE]. I independently reviewed and revised the output and take full responsibility for my critical assessment and comments.”

Basic spelling, grammar, and punctuation checks do not require disclosure.

7. Use of AI by Editors

Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and all related communications. Editors must not upload a manuscript, manuscript excerpt, figure, supplementary file, review report, author correspondence, or other confidential submission material into an unauthorized external AI tool.

AI tools must not replace an editor’s independent evaluation, selection of reviewers, interpretation of reviewer comments, editorial judgment, or final decision. Editors remain fully responsible for the editorial process, decisions, and communications with authors.

Editors may use AI tools in a limited supportive capacity for general background searches or to improve the language and structure of editorial templates or decision letters, provided that no confidential manuscript information is entered and adequate privacy safeguards are in place.

Use of a publisher-operated or journal-approved system specifically designed for editorial or research-integrity purposes may be permitted where appropriate contractual, confidentiality, data-protection, and human-oversight safeguards have been established.

8. AI in the Publication and Integrity-Checking Process

MEV may use automated or AI-assisted systems to support administrative, technical, editorial, or research-integrity functions, including similarity checking, submission screening, reviewer matching, and the identification of possible publication-integrity concerns.

Such systems serve only as decision-support tools. Editorial decisions and determinations of misconduct will remain subject to meaningful human assessment and oversight.

Output from an automated AI-detection system, by itself, does not constitute conclusive evidence of misconduct. Any concern identified through automated screening will be evaluated in context and, where appropriate, authors will be given an opportunity to provide an explanation.

9. Ethical and Responsible Use

Research involving AI must comply with applicable ethical, legal, and professional standards. Authors must consider, where relevant:

• privacy and protection of personal data;

• informed consent;

• bias, discrimination, and fairness;

• security and potential misuse;

• intellectual property and licensing;

• transparency and explainability;

• environmental and societal impacts; and

• accountability for decisions or outputs produced with AI assistance.

The use of AI does not reduce or transfer the ethical responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, or the publisher.

10. Compliance and Enforcement

Manuscripts involving AI will be evaluated according to the same standards of scientific validity, originality, methodological rigor, transparency, and publication ethics as other submissions.

Failure to disclose substantive AI use, entering confidential material into unauthorized AI systems, submitting fabricated AI-generated content, manipulating research evidence, or otherwise violating this policy may result in:

• a request for clarification or supporting documentation;

• correction or revision of the manuscript;

• rejection of the submission;

• withdrawal of an editorial or review assignment;

• correction, retraction, or other post-publication action; or

• further action under MEV’s publication ethics and misconduct procedures.

The appropriate response will depend on the nature, seriousness, timing, and consequences of the violation.

11. Policy Review and Updates

AI technologies and scholarly publishing practices continue to evolve. MEV will periodically review and update this policy to remain consistent with developments in research integrity, publication ethics, legal requirements, and responsible AI practices.

Last updated: August 2026