ReviewAnnals of medical and health sciences research2014
Knowing and avoiding plagiarism during scientific writing.
Review in Annals of medical and health sciences research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barriers to effective patient care as experienced by nurses in primary healthcare clinics in African countries: a systematic review of qualitative studies.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Plagiarism in Publications: All about Being Fair!The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Article
- Ethics: The Elixir of Publications.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Article
- Comparing new tools of artificial intelligence to the authentic intelligence of our global health students.BioData mining · 2024Article
- Addressing emerging issues in entomology: 2023 student debates.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2024Article
- Free software applications for authors for writing a research paper.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Review
- Are paid tools worth the cost? A prospective cross-over study to find the right tool for plagiarism detection.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Mastering the scientific peer review process: tips for young authors from a young senior editor.Journal of forestry research · 2022Article
- The Plague of Plagiarism: Prevention and Cure!!!Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2018Article
- Attitude of Indian dental professionals toward scientific publications: A questionnaire based study.Journal of natural science, biology, and medicine · 2015Article
- Ignorism.International journal of trichologyArticle
- Preparing and Publishing a Scientific Manuscript.Journal of human reproductive sciencesReview
- Plagiarism sensitized.Journal of Indian Prosthodontic SocietyArticle
- Insight into modern-day plagiarism: The science of pseudo research.Tzu chi medical journalReview
- Principles and practice of plagiarism: Perpetrators' perspective.Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeuticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plagiarism has become more common in both dental and medical communities. Most of the writers do not know that plagiarism is a serious problem. Plagiarism can range from simple dishonesty (minor copy paste/any discrepancy) to a more serious problem (major discrepancy/duplication of manuscript) when the authors do cut-copy-paste from the original source without giving adequate credit to the main source. When we search databases like PubMed/MedLine there is a lot of information regarding plagiarism. However, it is still a current topic of interest to all the researchers to know how to avoid plagiarism. It's time to every young researcher to know ethical guidelines while writing any scientific publications. By using one's own ideas, we can write the paper completely without looking at the original source. Specific words from the source can be added by using quotations and citing them which can help in not only supporting your work and amplifying ideas but also avoids plagiarism. It is compulsory to all the authors, reviewers and editors of all the scientific journals to know about the plagiarism and how to avoid it by following ethical guidelines and use of plagiarism detection software while scientific writing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.