Qanun Medika - Medical Journal Faculty of Medicine Muhammadiyah Surabaya recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI) tools may assist in academic writing, language editing, data analysis, and other research-related activities. The journal is committed to ensuring that the use of AI is transparent, responsible, and consistent with publication ethics. This policy is informed by the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools and the COPE Core Practices.

Authors may use AI tools to assist with language improvement, grammar correction, translation, formatting, literature organization, or other appropriate supporting tasks. However, AI tools must not replace the authors' critical thinking, scholarly judgment, verification of evidence, or responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript. Authors remain fully responsible for all content submitted for publication, consistent with the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools.

Authors must carefully review and verify any AI-generated or AI-assisted content before submitting their manuscripts. This includes checking the accuracy of factual statements, references, citations, data, interpretations, and conclusions. Authors are responsible for correcting fabricated references, misleading statements, inaccurate information, or other errors introduced by AI tools, in line with the ethical responsibilities described in the COPE Core Practices.

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI tools when such tools have contributed to the preparation or development of the submitted manuscript, beyond routine spelling, grammar, or basic language correction. The disclosure should identify the AI tool used, its purpose, and the relevant parts of the work in which it was used. This transparency requirement is informed by the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools.

AI use should be disclosed in an appropriate section of the manuscript, such as an Acknowledgments section or a separate AI Use Declaration, where applicable. Authors should describe the nature of the assistance accurately and should not imply that AI-generated material was independently produced or verified when it was not.

Suggested disclosure statement:

Declaration of AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of AI tool] for [describe the purpose of use]. The author(s) reviewed, edited, and verified the resulting content and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the published work.

If no AI tools were used in preparing the manuscript, authors may state: “The author(s) did not use generative AI tools in the preparation of this manuscript.” Authors should ensure that any disclosure accurately reflects their actual use of AI tools.

AI tools, chatbots, and other non-human systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to this journal. Authorship requires human accountability and responsibilities that AI systems cannot assume. This principle follows the COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI Tools and COPE's guidance on Authorship and Contributorship.

Human authors must meet the journal's authorship criteria, approve the final manuscript, and accept responsibility for its contents. Any significant contribution from a human individual must be assessed under the journal's authorship and acknowledgment policies rather than attributed to an AI system.

Authors must not use AI tools to fabricate or falsify research data, generate deceptive results, create false citations, misrepresent sources, plagiarize the work of others, or conceal research misconduct. Any AI-assisted content that compromises the accuracy, originality, or integrity of the manuscript may lead to editorial action under the journal's publication ethics procedures. These requirements are informed by the COPE Core Practices on Intellectual Property and Allegations of Misconduct.

Authors must not rely on AI-generated references without verifying that the cited works exist and accurately support the statements made. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted text, images, tables, or other materials do not infringe copyright, violate confidentiality, or breach applicable research ethics requirements.

Editors may use appropriate AI-enabled tools to support administrative or editorial tasks, provided that such use does not compromise confidentiality, editorial independence, fairness, or the integrity of editorial decisions. AI tools must not replace the editor's professional judgment in assessing a manuscript's suitability, scientific merit, ethical compliance, or publication decision. This approach is informed by the COPE Discussion Document on Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Decision Making.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, reviewer reports, author identities, unpublished research data, or editorial correspondence to public or otherwise unauthorized AI services. Any AI-assisted editorial process must comply with the journal's confidentiality requirements and applicable data-protection obligations.

Reviewers must assess manuscripts independently and maintain the confidentiality of all materials received during peer review. Reviewers must not upload manuscripts, unpublished data, figures, supplementary files, or confidential editorial communications to public or unauthorized AI tools. These requirements are consistent with the principles of confidentiality and responsible conduct described in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Reviewers must not delegate the substantive evaluation of a manuscript to AI tools or submit AI-generated assessments as a substitute for their own expert judgment. If AI assistance is permitted for limited tasks, reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy, fairness, confidentiality, and integrity of their reports and must follow the journal's instructions.

AI-generated or AI-modified images, figures, tables, or other visual materials must be disclosed where their use is relevant to the research or could affect the interpretation of the findings. Authors must ensure that such materials do not misrepresent evidence, alter research results deceptively, or violate copyright, consent, or research ethics requirements. The journal may request original files, source data, or further clarification when necessary to evaluate the integrity of submitted materials, consistent with the COPE Core Practices.

AI tools must not be used to fabricate, manipulate, or selectively alter research images or data in ways that mislead readers about the underlying evidence. Authors remain responsible for the authenticity and accurate presentation of all research materials included in their manuscripts.

The journal may investigate suspected undisclosed or inappropriate AI use when concerns arise during editorial assessment, peer review, or after publication. Authors may be asked to explain how AI tools were used and to provide relevant supporting information. Any editorial action will be based on the available evidence and the seriousness of the concern, following the COPE Core Practices on Allegations of Misconduct.

Where AI use has resulted in fabricated content, plagiarism, unreliable findings, or other breaches of publication ethics, the journal may request revisions, reject the manuscript, publish a correction, or take other appropriate action in accordance with its editorial policies and relevant COPE guidance.

As AI technologies and publication ethics standards continue to evolve, Qanun Medika - Medical Journal Faculty of Medicine Muhammadiyah Surabaya may update this policy to reflect emerging best practices, changes in scholarly publishing, and relevant guidance from COPE. Authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to comply with the version of the policy applicable to their submission or editorial activity.