The policies on the use of large language models in radiological journals are lacking: a meta-research study

TL;DR

This study finds that most radiology journals lack clear policies on using large language models, and suggests creating a shared reporting guideline to improve transparency.

Contribution

The study is the first to systematically evaluate LLM use policies in radiological journals and identifies gaps in current guidelines.

Findings

Only 43.9% of radiological journals have LLM use policies.

Fewer than 5% of journals address the potential influence of LLMs in their policies.

The presence of LLM policies is strongly associated with the journal's publisher.

Abstract

To evaluate whether and how the radiological journals present their policies on the use of large language models (LLMs), and identify the journal characteristic variables that are associated with the presence.

In this meta-research study, we screened Journals from the Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging Category, 2022 Journal Citation Reports, excluding journals in non-English languages and relevant documents unavailable. We assessed their LLM use policies: (1) whether the policy is present; (2) whether the policy for the authors, the reviewers, and the editors is present; and (3) whether the policy asks the author to report the usage of LLMs, the name of LLMs, the section that used LLMs, the role of LLMs, the verification of LLMs, and the potential influence of LLMs. The association between the presence of policies and journal characteristic variables was evaluated.

The LLM use policies were presented in 43.9% (83/189) of journals, and those for the authors, the reviewers, and the editor were presented in 43.4% (82/189), 29.6% (56/189) and 25.9% (49/189) of journals, respectively. Many journals mentioned the aspects of the usage (43.4%, 82/189), the name (34.9%, 66/189), the verification (33.3%, 63/189), and the role (31.7%, 60/189) of LLMs, while the potential influence of LLMs (4.2%, 8/189), and the section that used LLMs (1.6%, 3/189) were seldomly touched. The publisher is related to the presence of LLM use policies (p < 0.001).

The presence of LLM use policies is suboptimal in radiological journals. A reporting guideline is encouraged to facilitate reporting quality and transparency.

It may facilitate the quality and transparency of the use of LLMs in scientific writing if a shared complete reporting guideline is developed by stakeholders and then endorsed by journals.

The policies on LLM use in radiological journals are unexplored.Some of the radiological journals presented policies on LLM use.A shared complete reporting guideline for LLM use is desired.

The policies on LLM use in radiological journals are unexplored.

Some of the radiological journals presented policies on LLM use.

A shared complete reporting guideline for LLM use is desired.

Figures