Artificial Intelligence–Generated Editorials in Radiology: Can Expert Editors Detect Them?

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Sorin V,
   2. Klang E

   . Large language models and the emergence phenomena. Eur J Radiology Open 2023;10:100494 doi:10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100494 pmid:37325497

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Hwang SI,
   2. Lim JS,
   3. Lee RW, et al

   . Is ChatGPT a “fire of Prometheus” for non-native English-speaking researchers in academic writing? Korean J Radiology 2023;24:952–59 doi:10.3348/kjr.2023.0773 pmid:37793668

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Shen Y,
   2. Heacock L,
   3. Elias J, et al

   . ChatGPT and other large language models are double-edged swords. Radiology 2023;307:e230163 doi:10.1148/radiol.230163 pmid:36700838

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   OpenAI. GPT-4 [Large language model]. March 14, 2023. https://chat.openai.com/chat.
5. 5.↵
   1. Peng C,
   2. Yang X,
   3. Chen A, et al

   . A study of generative large language model for medical research and healthcare. NPJ Digit Med 2023;6:210 doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00958-w pmid:37973919

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Koga S

   . The integration of large language models such as ChatGPT in scientific writing: harnessing potential and addressing pitfalls. Korean J Radiology 2023;24:924–25 doi:10.3348/kjr.2023.0738 pmid:37634646

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Doskaliuk B,
   2. Zimba O

   . Beyond the keyboard: academic writing in the era of ChatGPT. J Korean Med Sci 2023;38:e207 doi:10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e207 pmid:37401498

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Májovský M,
   2. Černý M,
   3. Kasal M, et al

   . Artificial intelligence can generate fraudulent but authentic-looking scientific medical articles: Pandora’s box has been opened. J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e46924 doi:10.2196/46924 pmid:37256685

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Martinez R

   . Specially in the last years…”: Evidence of ELF and non-native English forms in international journals. Eng Acad Purp 2018;33:40–52 doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.01.007

   CrossRef
10. 10.↵
    1. Else H

    . Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists. Nature 2023;613:423 doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00056-7 pmid:36635510

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Lee T-L,
    2. Ding J,
    3. Trivedi HM, et al

    . Understanding radiological journal views and policies on large language models in academic writing. J Am Coll Radiol 2024;21:678–82 doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2023.08.001 pmid:37558108

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Stokel-Walker C

    . ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove. Nature 2023;613:620–21 doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00107-z pmid:36653617

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Gao CA,
    2. Howard FM,
    3. Markov NS, et al

    . Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. NPJ Digit Med 2023;6:75 doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00819-6 pmid:37100871

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.
    1. Herbold S,
    2. Hautli-Janisz A,
    3. Heuer U, et al

    . A large-scale comparison of human-written versus ChatGPT-generated essays. Sci Rep 2023;13(1):18617 doi:10.1038/s41598-023-45644-9 pmid:37903836

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Dunnick NR

    . Life imitates art. Acad Radiology 2019;26:1281–82 doi:10.1016/j.acra.2019.06.001 pmid:31262676

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Dunnick NR

    . Burnout at home. Acad Radiology 2021;28:593–94 doi:10.1016/j.acra.2021.02.010 pmid:33663973

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Forman HP

    . Section editor’s notebook: health policy and practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;205:923 doi:10.2214/AJR.15.15142 pmid:26496538

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Forman HP

    . Section editor’s notebook: mentoring, academic careers, and manuscript reviewing. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;208:1 doi:10.2214/AJR.16.17519 pmid:27845839

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Brink JA

    . The Hatfields, the McCoys, and anthem’s new policy for advanced diagnostic imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 2018;15:2–3 doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.037 pmid:29222001

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Brink JA

    . Artificial intelligence for operations: the untold story. J Am Coll Radiol 2018;15:375–77 doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.01.031 pmid:29502645

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Arenson RL

    . Building a better online portal for patients to obtain radiologic results. Radiology 2019;290:144–45 doi:10.1148/radiol.2018182218 pmid:30398434

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Arenson RL

    . Imaging from hospital profit center to cost center. Radiology 2023;306:e222266 doi:10.1148/radiol.222266 pmid:36255315

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Castillo M

    . Do you need a coach? I do. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1015–17

    FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Castillo M

    , ed. Coffee houses and reading rooms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:817–19

    FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Wiesmann M

    . Beyond “see one, do one, teach one”: increasing patient safety in neuroradiology. Clin Neuroradiol 2018;28:471 doi:10.1007/s00062-018-0735-8 pmid:30377708

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Wiesmann M

    . Photon-counting CT: a quantum leap in diagnostic imaging?!. Clin Neuroradiol 2022;32:1–2 doi:10.1007/s00062-022-01145-2 pmid:35238977

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Chen M

    . Kafkaesque. J Neurointerv Surg 2014;6:329–31 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011239 pmid:24814513

    FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Chen M

    . A simple tactic to mitigate errors. J Neurointerv Surg 2022;14:1159–60 doi:10.1136/jnis-2022-019800 pmid:36375832

    FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    1. Campbell BCV

    . Clot length assessment in stroke therapy decisions. Stroke 2016;47:643–44 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.012261 pmid:26768205

    FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Campbell BCV

    . Challenges of mild stroke. Stroke 2020;51:3203–04 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.032358 pmid:33081603

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Heath A

    . All the news from OpenAI’s first developer conference. November 6, 2023. Accessed October 28, 2024. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/6/23948619/openai-chatgpt-devday-developer-conference-news
32. 32.↵
    1. Elkhatat AM,
    2. Elsaid K,
    3. Almeer S

    . Evaluating the efficacy of AI content detection tools in differentiating between human and AI-generated text. Int J Educ Integr 2023;19:1–16 doi:10.1007/s40979-023-00140-5

    CrossRef