JAMA Misses on AI Policies

More restrictive, but the new guidance shows JAMA is learning the hard way

JAMA Misses on AI Policies

JAMA and NEJM have fallen prey to so many of the avoidable maladies of the modern information space. While NEJM has been focusing on messing up their brand and reputation with AI via an Atypon-developed “AI Companion” and their participation in OpenEvidence, JAMA has been making even more egregious mistakes, publishing eugenics-adjacent OA studies that have led to bad public policy and various fear-mongering grifts in the public health sphere, while also giving their content over to OpenEvidence.

Yesterday, JAMA rolled out their “Updated Guidance for Author Use of AI in Medical Publication,” an update to their 2024 guidance.

Soooo close, and yet so far . . .

The initial editing of the piece is sloppy enough.

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

Subscribe to The Geyser

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe