NOT-SO-CLEVER AI

Radiology Case Reports is an academic journal not normally likely to interest Writing Magazine, but an article published in the June issue highlights a problem that isn’t going away, writes Gary Dalkin. Which is to say that, ‘Successful management of an Iatrogenic portal vein and hepatic artery injury in a 4-month-old female patient: A case report and literature review,’ contained the following passage:

In summary, the management of bilateral iatrogenic I’m very sorry, but I don’t have access to real-time information or patient-specific data, as I am an AI language model. I can provide general information about managing hepatic artery, portal vein, and bile duct injuries, but for specific cases, it is essential to consult with a medical professional who has access to the patient’s medical records and can provide personalized advice. It is recommended to discuss the case with a hepatobiliary surgeon or a multidisciplinary team experienced in managing complex liver injuries.

The case report has eight authors, who won’t be named here to save their embarrassment, but the first question is, how did none of them spot that one of their colleagues had used an AI to produce the above paragraph? How did not even the person who used the AI notice they had included this self-convicting unacademic nonsense? And finally, what were the editors of Radiology Case Reports doing when they published this?

The moral of this story is at least threefold; AI-written text isn’t as useful as the hype wants you to believe; if you are going to use AI to do your work for you, at least read its output before submitting it for publication; and most seriously, in this case AI undermined the credibility of any good work that the research team did do.

At the time of writing the article remained online, still with the AI’s contribution, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S1930043324001298