Eine neue KI-gestützte Prüfung der Columbia University School of Nursing zeigt, dass fast 3.000 von Experten begutachtete medizinische Arbeiten gefälschte Zitate enthalten, die in wissenschaftlichen Datenbanken nicht vorkommen. Die Ergebnisse verdeutlichen einen alarmierenden Trend im wissenschaftlichen Publizieren, da der Einsatz von KI zunimmt
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1127364
20 Kommentare
A new Columbia University School of Nursing AI-assisted audit reveals nearly 3,000 peer-reviewed medical papers have fake citations that do not exist in scientific databases. The results highlight an alarming trend in academic publishing as the use of AI grows. The peer-reviewed research letter, “Fabricated citations: an audit across 2·5 million biomedical papers,” was published in The Lancet on May 7, 2026. (Research letters published in the Correspondence section include research findings and are externally peer-reviewed. Unlike Articles containing original data, research letters are shorter and the research they contain is usually preliminary, exploratory, or reporting on early findings.)
To conduct their analysis, the research team developed an automated verification system using AI that scanned 2.5 million papers published from January 1, 2023, to February 18, 2026, in PubMed Central’s Open Access. Among 97.1 million verified references, they identified 4,046 fake citations across 2,810 papers. The rate grew more than 12-fold since 2023, with the sharpest increase beginning mid-2024, coinciding with the rise of AI writing tools.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(26)00603-3/fulltext
There need to be penalties for this type of behavior. Ban them from publishing at all for 5 years. If the actually data was faked, permanent ban.
Shame on these journals for charging publishing and access fees and not doing the most basic of editorial checks; confirming citations.
The chickens are coming home to roost.
It’s about time if you ask me.
The optimist in me is hopeful that this research will lead to better detection and audit methods.
Also, it’s bad but at least it was 0.1% of papers and 0.004% of all citations checked.
With that said, I’m rather dismayed that my own job has become in large park checking AI outputs.
Anecdotal, but I had a journal inform me that 6 of my 41 citations were fake in my last manuscript. They were all real, properly formatted, and 5 of the 6 had DOI. It took a week of arguing with the editor before they hand-checked them, and admitted that their „automated system“ is sometimes incorrect. Wish I could simply stop publishing in the journal, but its the highest impact factor for my niche.
AI tools (read: LLMs) auditing AI slop. Great. Fantastic.
What is the damn point of science if none of the people involved are willing to use their heads?
My closed book written exams as an undergrad (biology major) required that you cited sources (author, year). A lot of the time I just made them up when I couldn’t remember the source haha
What do we do when the articles start to be fake? Fake scholar profiles and fake publications… I can’t with this timeline, man.
[deleted]
I saw a video about “paper mills” a few months ago. I wonder if this is tied to that. Essentially what their current MO was is to pick a publicly available medical data set, run a bunch of calculations, then turn every statistically significant finding into its own paper. Then they’d sell authorship to wannabe academics and submit the paper to a journal that lets you pay to publish.
The Harvard and the Mein Kampf scandals were the canary in the coal mine.
Post-secondary institutions undoubtedly have a place in society, but “when everyone’s super…” and all that. Education has become a business, and so long as everyone plays the game, and doesn’t scrutinize it too hard it “works”.
Remember criticism is not condemnation. I’m not saying university is dumb or pointless, merely that complacency will erode credibility, much as we’re seeing here in Canada with particular “diploma mills”.
there sure are a lot of geological forces acting orthogonally on a person’s desire to be paid to do science.
If you can’t take the time to write it, why should I take the time to read it? If you can’t take the time to check your own citations, you should be immediately ostracized from academia.
Treat it as the academic fraud it is.
You don’t need AI to check citations.
All these papers must be retracted and authors punished.
so basically my entire bibliography is just a lie i’ve been living in some kind of fake citation sim this whole time wow cool
fake citation is crazy. Like randomly citing an article after only scanning the abstract is one thing, I run into that quite often as a reviewer… but just straight up making up citation for articles that don’t exist?
I wish people were being held accountable for their misuse of ai. It’s happening at every level of some pretty serious industries and it’s not trustworthy, and people don’t have the attention to detail to catch the mistakes, which are many.