Who reviewed this? Toward responsible integration of large language models for peer review of scientific articles in dental medicine

Authors

  • Florin Eggmann Department of Periodontology, Endodontology, and Cariology, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6185-1480
  • Hauke Hildebrand Department of Periodontology, Endodontology, and Cariology, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6565-2451
  • Michael M. Bornstein Department of Oral Health & Medicine, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7773-8957

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2025-03-01

PMID:

40985918

Keywords:

Artificial intelligence, Dentistry, Editorial Policies, Machine Learning, Peer Review Research, Scholarly Communication

Abstract

The introduction and advancement of large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Google Gemini, present both opportunities and challenges for peer review in dental research. In this article, we propose a framework to inform the discourse on the responsible use of LLMs in dental peer review. We conducted a cross-sectional review of peer review policies from the top 50 dental journals, based on their 2024 Journal Impact Factor, to assess current guidance on LLM use. Our analysis revealed variability across dental journals: some journals permit restricted LLM use under specific conditions, while many either prohibit their use or lack explicit policies. Key concerns regarding LLM use identified by the authors include potential breaches of confidentiality, ambiguity in authorship, reduced reviewer accountability, and inherent limitations of LLMs in terms of domainspecific expertise and factual accuracy. Our proposed framework addresses confidentiality safeguards, suggested appropriate LLM applications, areas requiring caution, disclosure requirements, and accountability standards. It emphasizes that reviewers retain full responsibility for all submitted content, irrespective of LLM assistance. To protect confidentiality, the framework encourages offline or locally hosted LLMs. It also recommends regular policy reviews and reviewer training. This framework aims to support the thoughtful adoption of LLMs in dental research publishing. When employed judiciously, LLMs offer potential benefits in improving review clarity and efficiency, particularly for reviewers writing in a non-native language. However, their use must be grounded in clear ethical principles to ensure the integrity of dental peer review.

References

1. Eggmann F, Weiger R, Zitzmann NU, Blatz MB. Implications of large language models such as chatgpt for dental medicine. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023;35(7):1098-102.

2. Bornstein MM, Staedler YM, Cattin PC. Artifici-al intelligence will change the research en-vironment in dental medicine dramatically: Will algorithms replace literature reviews in the near future? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2025;54(5):329-31.

3. Büttner M, Leser U, Schneider L, Schwendicke F. Natural language processing: Chances and challenges in dentistry. J Dent. 2024;141:104796.

4. Fuchs A, Trachsel T, Weiger R, Eggmann F. ChatGPT's performance in dentistry and aller-gyimmunology assessments: A comparative study. Swiss Dent J. 2023;134(2):1-17.

5. Uribe SE, Maldupa I. Estimating the use of ChatGPT in dental research publications. J Dent. 2024;149:105275.

6. Rokhshad R, Bagherianlemraski M, Ehsani SS, Haghighat S, Schwendicke F. Large language models for the screening step in systematic re-views in dentistry. J Dent. 2025;160:105877.

7. Biswas S, Dobaria D, Cohen HL. ChatGPT and the future of journal reviews: A feasibility study. Yale J Biol Med. 2023;96(3):415-20.

8. Saad A, Jenko N, Ariyaratne S, Birch N, Iyengar KP, Davies AM, et al. Exploring the potential of ChatGPT in the peer review process: An obser-vational study. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2024;18(2):102946.

9. Marrella D, Jiang S, Ipaktchi K, Liverneaux P. Comparing AI-generated and human peer re-views: A study on 11 articles. Hand Surg Reha-bil. 2025:102225.

10. Checco A, Bracciale L, Loreti P, Pinfield S, Bian-chi G. AI-assisted peer review. Humanities and social sciences communications. 2021;8(1):1-11.

11. Lo Vecchio N. Personal experience with AI-generated peer reviews: A case study. Rese-arch Integrity and Peer Review. 2025;10(1):4.

12. Schintler LA, McNeely CL, Witte J. A critical examination of the ethics of AI-mediated peer review. arXiv preprint arXiv:230912356. 2023.

13. Hosseini M, Horbach SP. Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of chatgpt and other large language models in scholarly peer re-view. Research Integrity and Peer Review. 2023;8(1):4.

14. BaHammam AS. Peer review in the artificial intelligence era: A call for developing respon-sible integration guidelines. Nat Sci Sleep. 2025;17:159-64.

15. Joachim MV, Dodson TB, Laviv A. How artificial intelligence differs from humans in peer re-view. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2025;83(8):1040-50.

16. Li ZQ, Xu HL, Cao HJ, Liu ZL, Fei YT, Liu JP. Use of artificial intelligence in peer review among top 100 medical journals. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(12):e2448609.

17. Suchikova Y, Tsybuliak N, Teixeira da Silva JA, Nazarovets S. Gaidet (generative AI delegation taxonomy): A taxonomy for humans to dele-gate tasks to generative artificial intelligence in scientific research and publishing. Account Res. 2025:1-27. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2544331.

18. Wiwanitmkit S, Wiwanitkit V. Artificial intelli-gence, academic publishing, scientific writing, peer review, and ethics. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2024;39(4):e20230377.

19. Liang W, Izzo Z, Zhang Y, Lepp H, Cao H, Zhao X, et al. Monitoring AI-modified content at scale: A case study on the impact of ChatGPT on AI conference peer reviews. In: Ruslan S, Zico K, Katherine H, Adrian W, Nuria O, Jonathan S, et al., editors. Proceedings of the 41st Interna-tional Conference on Machine Learning; Pro-ceedings of Machine Learning Research: PMLR; 2024. p. 29575--620.

20. Poisot T. Here is a revised version of your re-view with improved clarity [Internet]. https://buttondown.com/ctrl-alt-tim/archive/vol-24-here-is-a-revised-version-of-your-review/ (last accessed on August 19, 2025). 2025. [cited 2025].

21. Routledge D, Pariente N. On improving the sustainability of peer review. PLoS Biol. 2025;23(3):e3003127.

22. Weber MT, Noll R, Marchl A, Facchinello C, Grünewaldt A, Hügel C, et al. Medbot vs realdoc: Efficacy of large language modeling in physician-patient communication for rare dis-eases. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2025;32(5):775-83.

23. Ayers JW, Poliak A, Dredze M, Leas EC, Zhu Z, Kelley JB, et al. Comparing physician and artifi-cial intelligence chatbot responses to patient questions posted to a public social media forum. JAMA Intern Med. 2023;183(6):589-96.

24. Lin Z. Hidden prompts in manuscripts exploit AI-assisted peer review. arXiv preprint arXiv:250706185. 2025.

25. Rich AS, Gureckis TM. Lessons for artificial intelligence from the study of natural stupidity. Nature Machine Intelligence. 2019;1(4):174-80.

26. Gruda D. Three AI-powered steps to faster, smarter peer review. Nature. 2025. doi: 10.1038/d41586-025-00526-0.

27. STM. Recommendations for a classification of AI use in academic manuscript preparation [In-ternet]. https://stm-assoc.org/document/recommendations-for-a-classification-of-ai-use-in-academic-manuscript-preparation/2025 (last accessed on August 19, 2025). 2025. [cited 2025].

Downloads

Published

2025-09-23

How to Cite

Eggmann, F., Hildebrand, H. ., & Bornstein, M. M. (2025). Who reviewed this? Toward responsible integration of large language models for peer review of scientific articles in dental medicine. SWISS DENTAL JOURNAL SSO – Science and Clinical Topics, 135(03), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2025-03-01

How to Cite

Eggmann, F., Hildebrand, H. ., & Bornstein, M. M. (2025). Who reviewed this? Toward responsible integration of large language models for peer review of scientific articles in dental medicine. SWISS DENTAL JOURNAL SSO – Science and Clinical Topics, 135(03), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2025-03-01