With the rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technology and its increasingly widespread application in the medical field, New Medicine hereby establishes the following regulations to uphold research integrity, prevent academic misconduct, and ensure the authenticity, accuracy, and transparency of the research process and its outcomes in the writing and peer review process.

1. Authors’ Responsibilities

(1) Authors may use GenAI tools only for non-critical research tasks, including but not limited to conceptualizing research ideas, language polishing and translation, literature retrieval, figure and table organization, auxiliary data analysis, and formatting. Authors are responsible for verifying all information provided by GenAI tools and confirming its authenticity and reliability.

(2) Authors are strictly prohibited from using GenAI to generate entire manuscripts or key components of papers, including research methods, data sources, interpretation and analysis of results, and core innovative contributions. GenAI may not be listed as an author, and authors must not conceal or obscure the use of GenAI in any form.

(3) Authors must ensure that the manuscript content is original and bear full responsibility for the authenticity and reliability of all academic content. If GenAI or related auxiliary technologies are used during manuscript preparation, a full, transparent, and detailed disclosure must be provided after the main text and before the references, or in the Methods section of the manuscript.

2. Reviewers’ Responsibilities

(1) Reviewers must strictly adhere to academic confidentiality and research integrity requirements. The full manuscript, author information, and all confidential materials related to peer review must not be uploaded to any public or third-party GenAI platforms.

(2) The academic evaluation, assessment of novelty, scientific review, and final review comments must be completed independently by the reviewer. GenAI tools may not be used to generate review opinions directly.

(3) Reviewers may use locally deployed GenAI tools in a limited capacity for auxiliary review purposes. If AI tools are used to assist in peer review, the specific usage scenarios and tool information must be annotated at the end of the review comments to ensure transparency of the review process.

(4) If reviewers identify non-compliant or improper use of GenAI in a manuscript during the review process, they should promptly report to the editorial office with corresponding evidence and clear comments.

3. Enforcement of GenAI Use Violations

To prevent the misuse of GenAI, New Medicine will implement multiple technical measures for pre-emptive risk control.

If the editorial office confirms that an author has violated the GenAI use regulations during manuscript preparation, the submission will be directly rejected or retracted. If such violations are identified as plagiarism, data fabrication, improper citation, or false representation attributable to GenAI use, they will be treated as academic misconduct and handled in accordance with this journal's Statement of Academic Misconduct.

Authors may report to the editorial office if reviewers violate the aforementioned regulations. Reviewers who improperly use GenAI during peer review, resulting in information leakage or infringement, will have their reviewer qualification revoked upon verification and may be held accountable as appropriate.

These regulations shall take effect from the date of release. The final interpretation right is reserved by the editorial office of New Medicine.

Editorial Office
New Medicine
April 30, 2026

For further information, please refer to the relevant policies on GenAI use for authors and journals issued by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) via the link: https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106.