aceResponsible use of large language models in manuscript authorship, peer review, and editorial processes: a Delphi consensus among editors-in-chief of anaesthesia and pain medicine journals (RULE-AP)
This article presents a Delphi consensus developed by a panel of editors-in-chief of anaesthesiology and pain medicine journals to guide the responsible use of large language models (LLMs) in academic publishing. LLMs offer potential benefits for scientific writing, including language editing, summarisation, translation, information organisation, and support for non-native English speakers, but their misuse raises concerns about accuracy, transparency, confidentiality, and research integrity. Through a three-rou…
LLMs can assist authors, reviewers and editors with limited tasks such as language editing, summarisation, translation and information organisation when use is disclosed and verified.
Misuse of LLMs in manuscript preparation and peer review risks hallucinations, confidentiality breaches, erosion of critical skills, and proliferation of low-quality manuscripts.
Findings reflect consensus of editors-in-chief in anaesthesiology and pain medicine, not broader scientific fields, based on 53 participants.
Evidence
- Peer-reviewedBritish Journal of Anaesthesia2026-02-26
How should this claim be treated?
Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-0374, v1: “Responsible use of large language models in manuscript authorship, peer review, and editorial processes: a Delphi consensus among editors-in-chief of anaesthesia and pain medicine journals (RULE-AP).” Truvace, 2026-07-20. /record/TRV-2026-0374 (accessed at citation time). sha256 21d0609831ce33fd…
Calibration history
Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.
Certified into the record
How to verify without trusting this page
Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-0374 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.