When Writing is No Longer Thinking: Safeguarding Clinical Scholarship in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: The rise of the Machines.

The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has prompted growing debate about its role in academic writing and the implications for scholarly integrity. This editorial arose from an increasing number of manuscript submissions to the journal that appeared unusually polished, leading editors and reviewers to question whether AI-assisted writing had been used and, if so, whether this should influence editorial decisions. While AI has the potential to enhance clarity, accessibility, and efficiency, concerns remain about transparency, authorship, accountability, and the authenticity of scholarly contribution. To explore these issues, we conducted an experiment in which one section of this editorial was written entirely by a human co-author, while the second was developed using outputs from multiple generative AI tools that were subsequently substantially edited by the other human co-author, who retained responsibility for the final text. By juxtaposing these pieces, we invite readers to consider whether AI-assisted scholarship is distinguishable from human-authored writing, whether such distinctions matter, and how AI use might be disclosed. We argue that transparent reporting of AI assistance, rather than its prohibition, is essential to maintaining trust, accountability, and integrity in academic publishing.