Chatbots, generative AI, and scholarly manuscripts: WAME recommendations on chatbots and generative artificial intelligence in relation to scholarly publications.

This statement revises our earlier "WAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications" (January 20, 2023). The revision reflects the proliferation of chatbots and their expanding use in scholarly publishing over the last few months, as well as emerging concerns regarding lack of authenticity of content when using chatbots. These recommendations are intended to inform editors and help them develop policies for the use of chatbots in papers published in their journals.

Erratum: Ethical issues in publishing in predatory journals.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.11613/BM.2017.

An international survey and modified Delphi process revealed editors' perceptions, training needs, and ratings of competency-related statements for the development of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals.

Scientific editors (i.e., those who make decisions on the content and policies of a journal) have a central role in the editorial process at biomedical journals.

Core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals: consensus statement.

Background: Scientific editors are responsible for deciding which articles to publish in their journals. However, we have not found documentation of their required knowledge, skills, and characteristics, or the existence of any formal core competencies for this role.

Methods: We describe the development of a minimum set of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals.

Ethical issues in publishing in predatory journals.

Predatory journals, or journals that charge an article processing charge (APC) to authors, yet do not have the hallmarks of legitimate scholarly journals such as peer review and editing, Editorial Boards, editorial offices, and other editorial standards, pose a number of new ethical issues in journal publishing. This paper discusses ethical issues around predatory journals and publishing in them. These issues include misrepresentation; lack of editorial and publishing standards and practices; academic deception; research and funding wasted; lack of archived content; and undermining confidence in research literature.

A scoping review of competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals.

Background: Biomedical journals are the main route for disseminating the results of health-related research. Despite this, their editors operate largely without formal training or certification. To our knowledge, no body of literature systematically identifying core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals exists.

Promoting Global Health.

The Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of MCH and AIDS (IJMA) is a member of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). The Editorial Board of IJMA believes it is important that the statement on promoting global health and this accompanying editorial is brought to the attention of our readers. Medical journal editors have a social responsibility to promote global health by publishing, whenever possible, research that furthers health worldwide.

Restoring the integrity of the clinical trial evidence base.

Calling researchers and editors to help restore invisible and abandoned trials

Getting more generous with the truth: clinical trial reporting in 2013 and beyond.

The editors discuss the recent initiative from the European Medicines Agency to commit to releasing clinical-trial data and how important such moves are for rebuilding trust between the pharmaceutical companies and society.