Skip to main content
Each snippet below is a starting point, not a finished line. Edit the bracketed variables — tool name, version, manufacturer, dates, scope, reviewer name — to match your project before submitting. The wording aligns with current ICMJE-style expectations and most major journal policies; for the principle behind these templates, see Declaring AI Use.
Check permission before you check wording. Some uses are now prohibited outright, not merely disclosable. As of August 2026, JAMA Network does not permit AI-generated or AI-formatted references, AI-drafted Opinion articles, Letters to the Editor or online Comments, or AI-created clinical images, illustrations, video or audio. A well-drafted disclosure does not make a prohibited use submittable. See Declaring AI Use for the current policy table.

​
How to use this page

  • Check the prohibitions first. Confirm the use is permitted at your target venue before you reach for wording.
  • Pick the scenario that matches your deliverable.
  • Edit every bracketed variable. A disclosure with [Author X] left in is a disclosure that doesn’t survive contact with reality.
  • Always name a human. A disclosure without a named, accountable reviewer is not a disclosure — it is a description.
  • Record dates and manufacturer. JAMA Network now asks for the software name, version, manufacturer, dates of use, and which portions of the content were affected. Capture these as you work; reconstructing them later is unreliable.
  • Match the venue. Default snippets here align with current ICMJE-style standards. Always check the journal’s, regulator’s, or sponsor’s specific policy at submission.
  • When in doubt, declare more, not less. Underdisclosure is the higher-risk position.

​
Manuscript — AI drafted a section

Use in the Methods or Acknowledgments section, per the journal’s policy.
[Tool name and version, e.g., Claude Opus 4.7] ([Manufacturer, e.g., Anthropic]) was used on [date(s) of use] to generate an initial draft of the [section, e.g., Discussion]. The output was reviewed, edited, and verified against the cited sources by [Author name(s)], who take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the final content. The tool was not used to perform analyses, generate data, or generate, format, or select references.

​
Manuscript — AI used for editing or proofing only

Use in the Acknowledgments section.
[Tool name and version, e.g., Claude Sonnet 4.6] ([Manufacturer]) was used on [date(s) of use] to assist with [editing for clarity / proofreading / language polishing] of human-written drafts. No content was generated by the tool. [Author name(s)] reviewed all suggestions and take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the final manuscript.
Note: several journals, JAMA Network among them, permit grammar, spelling and language tools only on text a human wrote first. Basic spell-check and grammar correction generally needs no disclosure; substantive editing does.

​
Manuscript — AI used for translation

Use in the Methods section.
The manuscript was originally drafted in [source language] and translated into [target language] using [Tool name and version]. The translation was reviewed and corrected by [Author name(s) or qualified translator], who confirm the translated content accurately reflects the original.

​
Manuscript — AI used for reference verification

Use in the Methods or Acknowledgments section. Note the distinction: verifying existing references against sources is a QC activity and remains acceptable. Generating or formatting references with AI is prohibited by JAMA Network and discouraged elsewhere — build the reference list in a standard reference manager.
The reference list was compiled in [reference manager, e.g., EndNote / Zotero]. Cited references were subsequently verified against their source documents using [Tool name and version, e.g., RefCheckr] on [date(s) of use]. All claims and numerical data were cross-checked against the cited sources. No AI tool was used to generate or format references. [Author name(s)] reviewed and confirmed the verification output and take responsibility for the completeness, accuracy, and integrity of the final reference set.

​
Manuscript — AI used for figure or visual abstract generation

Use in the figure caption and the Methods section. Many journals restrict AI for scientific figures — check the journal’s specific policy before use. JAMA Network does not permit AI-created or AI-manipulated clinical images, illustrations, video or audio unless they form part of a disclosed research design; this snippet covers conceptual visuals only.
The [visual abstract / concept figure / illustration] was generated using [Tool name and version, e.g., Nano Banana 2] ([Manufacturer]) on [date(s) of use] from a prompt describing [content]. The image was reviewed for accuracy by [Author name(s)] and is intended as a conceptual illustration, not as a clinical image or primary scientific data.

​
Manuscript — existing scientific image adjusted with software

Use in the figure legend. Adjustments must be applied uniformly to the whole image and must not selectively highlight, obscure, or misrepresent any clinical or scientific element. Retain the original unedited files for editorial review.
[Brightness / contrast / colour] was adjusted uniformly across the entire image using [Software name and version]. [Where applicable: non-clinically-relevant background was replaced with a solid colour.] No clinical or scientific elements were selectively enhanced, obscured, or removed. Original unedited images are available for editorial review.

​
Conference abstract or poster

Use in the abstract footer or poster Acknowledgments.
[Tool name and version] was used to assist with [drafting / editing / translation] of this [abstract / poster]. The output was reviewed by [Author name(s)], who take responsibility for the content.

​
Plain language summary

Use in the PLS document, typically in a footer or methods note.
This plain language summary was developed with assistance from [Tool name and version, e.g., Patiently AI] to translate clinical findings into accessible language. The summary was reviewed for accuracy and clarity by [Author name(s) / patient advisor / medical reviewer], who confirm the content reflects the source [paper / trial results].

​
Regulatory document (CSR section, IB, Module 2 summary, etc.)

Use per the relevant agency guidance and your sponsor’s SOP. Always route through regulatory affairs review before finalising.
[Tool name and version] was used to assist with drafting [section / module]. The output was reviewed against [source data / SAP / protocol] by [Author name(s)] and approved by [regulatory reviewer / responsible signatory] in accordance with [sponsor SOP reference]. Tool use is documented in [project audit log location].

​
Promotional or MLR-bound material

Use per the applicable code (ABPI, IFPMA, etc.) and your client’s SOP. The disclosure may be internal-only depending on the deliverable.
AI tool [Tool name and version] was used to assist with [drafting / editing / claim verification] of this material. All claims have been verified against approved references and the approved messaging framework. The content was reviewed for code compliance by [reviewer name / role] before submission to MLR.

​
Internal client deliverable (briefing doc, internal report, leave-piece copy)

Use in the document footer or AI-use log per client SOP.
Drafted with assistance from [Tool name and version], used for [drafting / summarisation / editing]. Reviewed and finalised by [Author name]. AI use logged per [project SOP / agency SOP reference].

​
Where no snippet exists — because the use is not permitted

There is deliberately no template on this page for the following. At JAMA Network these are prohibited outright, and other journals are moving the same way. If you need one of these done, it needs a human to do it.
  • Drafting Opinion articles, editorials, Letters to the Editor, or online Comments. Human insight is the point of the format.
  • Generating or formatting references or bibliographies. Use a reference manager.
  • Creating or manipulating clinical images, illustrations, video, or audio outside a disclosed research design.
  • Peer review — entering a manuscript, or your summary of one, into an external AI tool breaches reviewer confidentiality. See AI in Peer Review.
  • Drafting author responses to reviewer or editor comments.

​
Notes on adapting these snippets

  • Be specific about scope. “AI was used” is not specific enough. Name what the tool did and what it didn’t do.
  • Include the manufacturer and the dates. Increasingly expected, and trivial to capture at the time — nearly impossible to reconstruct months later.
  • State responsibility explicitly. Several policies now want a positive confirmation that the authors take responsibility for accuracy and integrity, not just an account of what the tool did.
  • Document contemporaneously. Build the disclosure as you write, not at submission. The audit-trail expectations in Review and Accountability feed directly into the disclosure.
  • Specify the version where it matters. “Claude” alone is less defensible than “Claude Opus 4.7” if questions arise about a particular output six months later.
  • Don’t conflate categories. If AI was used for both editing and translation, declare both explicitly. Don’t roll them into a vague “language assistance” line.
  • Mirror the journal’s preferred format. Some journals want a dedicated AI-use statement; others embed it in the Methods. Check before submission.
Last reviewed: 11 August 2026 · 6 min read