The Revista Médica del IMSS recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI) tools, particularly generative AI and multimodal models, may be used as auxiliary support in writing, translation, language editing, information organization, and other technical activities related to scholarly communication. However, their use in manuscripts, editorial processes, and peer review must be governed by the principles of transparency, human oversight, accountability, data protection, confidentiality, scientific integrity, and respect for human rights.

In accordance with the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals issued by the ICMJE, the Authorship and AI tools statement of COPE, the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence of UNESCO, the Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health guidance of the WHO, as well as the General Law on the Protection of Personal Data Held by Obligated Subjects and the Manual for Systematized Search of Medical Evidence Assisted by Artificial Intelligence (AI) issued by the Mexican Ministry of Health, this journal establishes the following editorial criteria for the responsible use of AI in the biomedical field.

 

Core Criteria

1. Transparency and mandatory disclosure.
Any use of AI tools in the drafting, review, editing, or processing of a manuscript must be expressly disclosed. The disclosure must indicate the tool used, its purpose, and, where applicable, the section of the manuscript in which it was employed. In the case of authors, this information must be provided from the time of manuscript submission and reflected in the relevant part of the document.

2. Authorship and human responsibility.
AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript. Scientific authorship requires responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and traceability of the work, conditions that can only be fulfilled by individuals. Accordingly, authors assume full responsibility for all content generated or assisted by AI.

3. Permissible use and mandatory verification.

AI may be used only as an auxiliary tool and never as a substitute for academic, clinical, methodological, or editorial judgment. All AI-generated output must be reviewed, corrected, and validated by authors, reviewers, or editors, as appropriate. The use of AI-generated content as a primary source of evidence will not be accepted, nor the incorporation of texts, images, references, or data without sufficient verification of their accuracy, relevance, and proper attribution.

4. Confidentiality, data protection, and sensitive material.
It is prohibited to enter unpublished manuscripts, peer review reports, identifiable clinical data, patient images, sensitive databases, or any other confidential material into AI systems when their protection cannot be guaranteed. In the processing of personal data, the principles of lawfulness, purpose, fairness, consent, quality, proportionality, information, and accountability must be observed, along with the technical, physical, and administrative security measures established in Mexican legislation. In the case of sensitive personal data, particularly health-related information, protection must be reinforced and express consent obtained whenever legally required.

5. Peer review and editorial decisions.
Reviewers and editors must not upload manuscripts under evaluation to AI platforms when confidentiality is not fully assured or when the journal has not expressly authorized such use. The use of AI in peer review must, where applicable, be disclosed to the journal. No editorial decision may be delegated exclusively to automated systems; final scientific, ethical, and editorial assessment must always remain under human responsibility.

6. Scientific integrity and editorial actions.
Failure to disclose the use of AI, the improper generation or alteration of data, images, references, review reports, or results, as well as any use of AI that compromises scientific integrity, may result in requests for clarification, corrections, editorial rejection, or the application of the measures set forth in the journal’s ethics policies.

 

Ethical and Health-Related Scope

Given the biomedical nature of the journal, the use of AI must be assessed with particular caution when it involves health research, clinical information, sensitive personal data, or content that may influence diagnostic, therapeutic, educational, or public health decisions. The journal acknowledges that AI may provide relevant technical support, but maintains that its use must always remain subordinate to human responsibility, methodological scrutiny, and the ethical and legal protection of individuals.

 

---

Reference documents:

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, section “Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing”. 

Committee on Publication Ethics. Authorship and AI tools. :contentReference[oaicite:10]{index=10}

UNESCO. Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (2021). 

World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health (2021) and Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: Guidance on large multimodal models (2025). 

Chamber of Deputies of the H. Congress of the Union. General Law on the Protection of Personal Data Held by Obligated Subjects, current text with latest amendment published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on 14-11-2025. 

Ministry of Health, General Directorate for Health Sector Modernization. Manual for Systematized Search of Medical Evidence Assisted by Artificial Intelligence (AI) (2025).