Cell Reports' AI Policy: Cell Press Rules for the Broad-Scope OA Journal

Understanding where Cell Reports sits in the Cell Press hierarchy clarifies why the same AI policy plays out differently:

Publisher-reported acceptance figures link to their source. Elsevier catalog figures were checked in October 2026; the catalog does not specify the reporting period or submission denominator.

The practical implication: Cell Reports editors handle more papers with relatively fewer editorial hours per manuscript than Cell's editors. AI disclosure compliance depends more heavily on author self-reporting and reviewer attention at Cell Reports than at Cell itself.

This doesn't mean Cell Reports doesn't care about AI policy. It means that honest, thorough self-disclosure is even more important here because the editorial team can't apply the same per-manuscript scrutiny that a lower-volume journal can.

Cell Press publishes several journals under the "Cell Reports" brand, each following the same AI policy:

All five journals follow the Cell Press AI policy identically. If you've read the rules for one, you've read them for all.

Cell Reports Medicine deserves special attention. It publishes clinical and translational research, which means the same heightened AI considerations that apply at Nature Medicine or JAMA apply here: don't use AI for clinical data interpretation, don't process patient data through cloud AI tools, and be explicit about what AI did and didn't touch.

Place the statement in its own section after the declaration of interests, titled "Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process." If an AI tool is part of the research design or methods, also describe it in the methods or STAR Methods section, as the genomics and neuroscience examples show. The wording below is illustrative.

For a cell biology paper:

"During preparation of this manuscript, the authors used ChatGPT (GPT-4, OpenAI) to improve the clarity of the Discussion section. All AI-suggested text edits were reviewed by the corresponding author (A.B.). The authors take full responsibility for the published content."

For a genomics/bioinformatics paper:

"The RNA-seq analysis pipeline was built using DESeq2, edgeR, and custom R scripts (see STAR Methods: RNA-seq Analysis). GitHub Copilot (Microsoft) was used to assist with writing the custom gene ontology enrichment scripts. All code was validated against published datasets. ChatGPT (GPT-4, OpenAI) was used to improve the language of the Results section. The authors take full responsibility for the content."

For a neuroscience paper submitted to Cell Reports:

"Calcium imaging data was processed using Suite2p (Pachitariu et al., 2017) as described in STAR Methods: Imaging Analysis. During manuscript preparation, Claude (Claude 3.5, Anthropic) was used to edit the Introduction and Methods sections for language clarity. All AI-generated suggestions were reviewed by the senior author (C.D.). The authors take full responsibility for the published content."

For a Cell Reports Medicine paper:

"No patient data was processed through cloud-based AI tools. During manuscript preparation, ChatGPT (GPT-4, OpenAI) was used to improve the readability of the Discussion. No AI tools were used for clinical data interpretation or outcome reporting. All AI-suggested text was reviewed by the clinical investigators (E.F. and G.H.). The authors take full responsibility for the content."

Cell Press handles concerns about published papers following guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

During review:

• If a disclosure is missing, add the statement before the paper is accepted

After publication:

• Depending on the findings, the outcome can be no further action, an editorial note, a correction, or a retraction

• An editorial expression of concern may be published while an investigation is ongoing

The open access factor: Cell Reports is fully OA, meaning every paper, and every correction or retraction, is freely visible worldwide. Unlike a subscription journal where corrections might only be noticed by active subscribers, a Cell Reports correction shows up for anyone searching for the paper on Google Scholar, PubMed, or the journal's website. The reputational cost of a post-publication issue is amplified by universal access.

Volume and pattern detection: Because Cell Reports processes so many manuscripts, the editorial team accumulates pattern-recognition experience with AI disclosure issues. Editors who've seen hundreds of disclosure statements can spot missing or inadequate disclosures more efficiently than editors at low-volume journals. Don't assume the volume means lower scrutiny, it means more experienced scrutiny.

Cell Reports sits between the elite Cell Press journals (Cell, Cancer Cell) and the mega-journals (PLOS ONE, Scientific Reports) in terms of selectivity and per-paper editorial attention. Its AI enforcement reflects this middle position: more systematic than a mega-journal, less intensive per-paper than Cell itself.

If you're submitting to a non-Cell-Press Elsevier journal (like a journal in the Lancet family or a standard Elsevier title), check that journal's own placement instructions. At Cell Reports, the statement goes in its own section after the declaration of interests, and any AI tool that is part of the research design is also described in the methods or STAR Methods section.

For standard research articles:

• Put the AI disclosure in its own section after the declaration of interests

• Include tool name, version, and specific use case

• If you used AI during revisions, update the disclosure statement in your revised manuscript

For papers with computational analysis:

• Deposit all code in a public repository

• Clearly separate research software from AI writing tools in STAR Methods

• AI-generated analysis code should be validated against known results

For Cell Reports Medicine submissions:

• Don't process patient data through cloud AI

• Keep AI away from clinical interpretation

• Be explicit about what AI didn't do, especially for clinical content

For non-native English speakers:

• AI-assisted language editing is perfectly acceptable at Cell Reports

• Disclose it in the declaration statement with the tool name, version, and what you asked it to do

• This is a legitimate use case that Cell Press has publicly supported

Before submission checklist:

• [ ] AI disclosure statement in its own section after the declaration of interests (and in the methods or STAR Methods if an AI tool is part of the research design)

• [ ] Tool names, versions, and specific use cases listed

• [ ] Research tools in standard STAR Methods (not AI disclosure)

• [ ] No generative AI used to create or alter research or data images, and no general-purpose generative AI image tool for the graphical abstract

• [ ] Analysis code validated and deposited

• [ ] All co-authors reviewed the disclosure

• [ ] Graphical abstract made with BioRender, Illustrator, or similar

A Cell Reports submission readiness check can help verify your Cell Reports submission meets Cell Press requirements before submission.

Comply proactively if:

• You used any AI tool (ChatGPT, Grammarly, Copilot) during manuscript preparation

• The journal requires an AI use declaration after the declaration of interests

• Your institution has its own AI use policy that may be stricter

Less concerned if:

• You used AI only for grammar/spell checking (most journals exempt this)

• The journal does not have a formal AI policy yet

• Your use was limited to basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, or references (basic tools do not need a declaration)