Keywords
Ethics, research
Researcher personnel
Scientific publication ethics
Public health
How to Cite
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has been progressively incorporated into the fields of science and technology. Researchers use this tool in their scientific activities to facilitate text generation and data analysis, thereby supporting their activities. AI-based applications can benefit different areas, such as education and health promotion, through accessible, affordable, and interactive solutions. On the other hand, its application has raised important questions regarding ethics and integrity in research. The objective of this paper is to highlight some topics related to AI in scientific investigation and emphasize the importance of responsible conduct by researchers, based on ethics and integrity in public health research. Debates have been promoted in educational institutions, particularly regarding the responsible conduct of investigations and, consequently, their publications. Values such as honesty, transparency, and responsibility are essential to ensuring the reliability of studies.
References
1. Jungwirth D, Haluza D. Artificial intelligence and public health: an exploratory study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(5):4541. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054541.
2. Giansanti D. Artificial intelligence in public health: current trends and future possibilities. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(19):11907. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191911907.
3. Plebani M. Total laboratory automation: fit for its intended purposes? Clin Chem Lab Med. 2025; https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2025-0855.
4. Patel K, Arvisais-Anhalt S, Bunch DR, Holmes DT, Spies NC. Robotic process automation in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem. 2025;28:hvaf060. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvaf060.
5. Grech V, Cuschieri S, Eldawlatly AA. Artificial intelligence in medicine and research - the good, the bad, and the ugly. Saudi J Anaesth. 2023; 17(3):401-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_344_23.
6. Chetwynd E. Ethical use of artificial intelligence for scientific writing: current Trends. J Hum Lact. 2024;40(2):211-5. https://doi.org/10.1177/08903344241235160.
7. Castejon MJ, Almodovar AAB, Carmo AMS, López Lopes GIS, Catarino RM, Pereira TC, et al. Integridade na pesquisa em saúde pública – a importância da atribuição justa de autoria em publicações científicas. BEPA, Bol. epidemiol. paul. 2024; 21: e40951. https://doi.org/10.57148/bepa.2024.v.21.40951.
8. Lopes CMN, Mendes JC. Ética e inteligência artificial: desafios e melhores práticas. [Internet]. Belo Horizonte: Rev da UFMG. 2023; 30:45–62. [acesso 26 junho 2025] https://doi.org/10.35699/2965‑6931.2023.47673.
9. Lamb LC. Ética em IA e IA ética: prolegômenos e estudo de casos significativos. [Internet]. São Paulo: Rev USP. 2024; 141:107-20. [acesso 26 junho 2025]. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.i141p107-120.
10. Bennett DM, Taylor DM. Unethical practices in authorship of scientific papers. Emerg Med (Fremantle). 2003; 15(3):263-70. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-2026.2003.00432.x.
11. Almeida V, Nas E. Desafios da IA responsável na pesquisa científica. [Internet]. São Paulo: Rev USP. 2024; 141:17-28. [acesso 11 julho 2025]. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.i141p17-28.
12. Resnik DB, Hosseini M. The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool. AI Ethics. 2025; 5(2):1499-1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00493-8.
13. Kaul V, Enslin S, Gross SA. History of artificial intelligence in medicine. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020; 92(4):807-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.040.
14. Padoan A, Plebani M. Artificial intelligence: is it the right time for clinical laboratories? Clin Chem Lab Med. 2022; 60(12):1859-61. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2022-1015
15. Sánchez-Sotelo J, Jed Kuhn JE, Mallon WJ. Artificial intelligence and the creation of scientific papers. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2023; 32(4):685-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2023.02.002.
16. Joiner IA. Emerging library technologies: it’s not just for geeks. Cambridge: Chandos Publishing; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2016-0-05178-1.
17. Costa AHR, Cozman FG. O futuro da pesquisa em inteligência artificial. [Internet]. São Paulo: Rev USP. 2024;141:133-46. [acesso 25 julho 2025]. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.i141p133-146.
18. Kellner AWA. Artificial intelligence in scientific publications? An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2023; 95(suppl 1):e202395S1. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-37652023202395S1.
19. Sampaio RC, Sabbatini M, Limongi R. Diretrizes para o uso ético e responsável da inteligência artificial generativa: um guia prático para pesquisadores. [Internet]. São Paulo: Intercom; 2024. [acesso 26 junho 2025] Disponível: https://prpg.unicamp.br/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2025/01/livro-diretrizes-ia-1.pdf.
20. Boscardin CK, Gin B, Golde PB, Hauer KE. ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence for medical education: potential impact and opportunity. Acad Med. 2024; 99(1):22-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005439.
21. Rossoni L. A inteligência artificial e eu: escrevendo o editorial juntamente com o ChatGPT. Recadm. 2022; 21(3): 399-405. https://doi.org/10.21529/RECADM.2022ed3.
22. Zhu H, Shuhuai L. Instant prediction of scientific paper cited potential based on semantic and metadata features: taking artificial intelligence field as an example. PLoS One. 2024; 19(12):e0312945. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312945.
23. Park JY. Could ChatGPT help you to write your next scientific paper?: concerns on research ethics related to usage of artificial intelligence tools. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023; 49(3):105-06. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2023.49.3.105.
24. Stokel-Walker C. ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. Nature. 2023; 613(7945):620-21. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z.
25. Thorp HH. ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science. 2023; 379(6630):313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879.
26. Hosseini M, Resnik DB, Holmes K. The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts. Research Ethics. 2023; 19(4) 449–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231180449.
27. Hosseini M, Rasmussen LM, Resnik DB. Using AI to write scholarly publications. Account Res. 2023; 31(7): 715-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535.
28. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. [Internet]. 2025. [acesso 3 julho 2025]. Disponível: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/.
29. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship and AI tools. [Internet]. 2023. [acesso 3 julho 2025]. Disponível: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/authorship-and-ai-tools.
30. Gottlieb M, Kline JA, Schneider AJ, Coates WC. ChatGPT and conversational artificial intelligence: friend, foe, or future of research? Am J Emerg Med. 2023;70:81-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2023.05.018.
31. São Paulo. Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Comitê de Integridade na Pesquisa do Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Código de boas práticas científicas do Instituto Adolfo Lutz. [Internet]. 2023. 34p. [acesso 22 julho 2025]. Disponível: https://search.bvsalud.org/gim/resource/en/biblio-1451249.
32. São Paulo. Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Comitê de Integridade na Pesquisa do Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Procedimento de averiguação de alegações de más condutas científicas. [Internet]. 2025. 36p. [acesso 22 julho 2025]. Disponível: https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/ses/resource/pt/biblio-1609399.
33. Elali FR, Rachid LN. AI-generated research paper fabrication and plagiarism in the scientific community. Patterns. 2023; 4(3):100706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100706.
34. Walters WH, Wilder EI. Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT. Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):14045. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41032-5.
35. Arbix G. Potencial e riscos da IA na ciência. [Internet]. São Paulo: Rev USP. 2024; 141:9-16. [acesso 26 junho 2025]. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9036.i141p9-16.
36. Messeri L, Crockett MJ. Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific
research. Nature. 2024; 627(8002):49-58. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07146-0.
37. São Paulo. Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Portaria IAL nº 16, de 31 de julho de 2017. Criação do Comitê de Integridade na Pesquisa do Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Diário Oficial do Estado. [Internet]. São Paulo, p27, 1 ago 2017. [acesso 4 agosto 2025]. Seção 1. Disponível: https://www.ial.sp.gov.br/resources/editorinplace/ial/2017_8_15/portaria_dg_ial_16_de_criacao_do_cipial_31_07_2017.pdf.
40. Alnaimat F, AlSamhori ARF, El Sharu H, Othman L, Oralbek A, Zimba O. Artificial intelligence in detecting statistical errors: implications for authors, reviewers, and editors. J Korean Med Sci. 2025;40(49):e342.https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e342
41. Alsulimani A, Akhter N, Jameela F, Ashgar RI, Jawed A, Hassani MA, et al. The impact of artificial intelligence on microbial diagnosis. Microorganisms. 2024;12(6):1051. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12061051
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Márcia Jorge Castejon, Adriana Aparecida Buzzo Almodovar , Giselle Ibette Silva López Lopes, Jerenice Esdras Ferreira , Maria Cecilia Cergole-Novella , Tatiana Caldas Pereira , Bráulio Caetano Machado