Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Generative AI in scientific publishing: disruptive or destructive?

Nature Reviews Urology volume 21, pages 1–2 (2024)Cite this article

Subjects

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize scientific publishing. The influence of AI could be disruptive or destructive and its influence remains to be seen, but balance between the convenience and accessibility offered by AI-driven tools and the essential skills of deep scientific inquiry and communication needs to be found.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Fink, T. M. A., Reeves, M., Palma, R. & Farr, R. S. Serendipity and strategy in rapid innovation. Nat. Commun. 8, 2002 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Park, M., Leahey, E. & Funk, R. J. Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time. Nature 613, 138–144 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bloom, N., Jones, C. I., Van Reenen, J. & Webb, M. Are ideas getting harder to find? Am. Econ. Rev. 110, 1104–1144 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rice, D. B. et al. Academic criteria for promotion and tenure in biomedical sciences faculties: cross sectional analysis of international sample of universities. BMJ 369, m2081 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Stone, L. The dawning of the age of artificial intelligence in urology. Nat. Rev. Urol. 18, 322 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hutson, M. Could AI help you to write your next paper? Nature 611, 192–193 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Conroy, G. How ChatGPT and other AI tools could disrupt scientific publishing. Nature 622, 234–236 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Joaquin, J. J. & Biana, H. T. When authors play the predatory journals’ own game. Nature 621, 474 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Borgo Trento Hospital, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

    Riccardo Bertolo & Alessandro Antonelli

Authors
  1. Riccardo Bertolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandro Antonelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Bertolo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bertolo, R., Antonelli, A. Generative AI in scientific publishing: disruptive or destructive?. Nat Rev Urol 21, 1–2 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-023-00836-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-023-00836-w

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing