With the rapid development of generative artificial intelligence(GAI)technologies,their widespread application in academic research and writing is continuously expanding the boundaries of sci-entific inquiry.However,this trend has also raised a series of ethical and regulatory challenges,inclu-ding issues related to authorship,content authenticity,citation accuracy,and accountability.In light of the growing involvement of AI in generating academic content,establishing an open,controllable,and trustworthy ethical governance framework has become a key task for safeguarding research integrity and maintaining trust within the academic community.This expert consensus outlines ethical requirements across key stages of AI-assisted academic writing-including topic selection,data management,citation practices,and authorship attribution.It aims to clarify the boundaries and ethical obligations surrounding AI use in academic writing,ensuring that technological tools enhance efficiency without compromising in-tegrity.The goal is to provide guidance and institutional support for building a responsible and sustainable research ecosystem.

With the rapid development of generative artificial intelligence(GAI)technologies,their widespread application in academic research and writing is continuously expanding the boundaries of sci-entific inquiry.However,this trend has also raised a series of ethical and regulatory challenges,inclu-ding issues related to authorship,content authenticity,citation accuracy,and accountability.In light of the growing involvement of AI in generating academic content,establishing an open,controllable,and trustworthy ethical governance framework has become a key task for safeguarding research integrity and maintaining trust within the academic community.This expert consensus outlines ethical requirements across key stages of AI-assisted academic writing-including topic selection,data management,citation practices,and authorship attribution.It aims to clarify the boundaries and ethical obligations surrounding AI use in academic writing,ensuring that technological tools enhance efficiency without compromising in-tegrity.The goal is to provide guidance and institutional support for building a responsible and sustainable research ecosystem.

Objective To compare the clinical efficacies regarding femoral artery or radial artery approaches on coronary artery interventional therapies.Methods 360 patients were randomly divided into intervention group via femoral artery (TFI) or transradial coronary intervention (TRI) group.Postoperative observation on the two said groups of patients with vascular lesion characteristics,feasibility factors ( success rate of interventional therapy puncture,time of operation and hospitalization)and complications,were made.Results There were no significant differences between the two groups on the characteristics of vascular lesion (P＞0.05).Success rates of the two groups were 97.78％ and 96.67％ respectively.The differences on success rate,time of operation were not statistically significant (P＞0.05) while the average time of puncture,the mean duration of hospitalization and the rates of complications were significantly different ( P＜ 0.05 ).Conclusion The two methods under comparison had similar success rate and feasibility.However,the complications related to radial artery interventional therapy were much less than the femoral artery interventional therapy.As having better safety,radial artery interventional therapv seemed to have applicable value on clinical oractice.

Objective To observe the clinical efficacy and safety of Puerarin Injection treatment on angina pectoris.Methods 388 patients with angina pectoris,enrolled to Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital during January 2009 and February 2011 were selected and randomly divided into treatment or control groups with 194 patients of each.Based on the conventional therapy program,one group was given Puerarin Injection as treatment group while,the other was given with Danshen Injection as control group.Clinical efficacy,the attack rate of angina pectoris,oxygen consumption,iadices on electrocardiogram,haemorheology and other adverse reactions among the two groups were compared.Results The total efficacy of the treatment group (88.14％,171/194)was significantly higher than the control group (61.86％,120/194) and the difference was statistically significant (P＜0.05).During the treatment,no significant adverse events were noticed in both of the two groups of patients.Conclusion The Puerarin Injection treatment program on angina pectoris seemed effective and safe.

king condition before pregnancy were associated with the development of polydactyly and syndactyly.