ArticleMedical journal, Armed Forces India2018
Wishing away Plagiarism in Scientific Publications! Will it work? A situational analysis of Plagiarism policy of journals in PubMed.
Article in Medical journal, Armed Forces India, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlagiarism remains a scourge for the modern academia. There are inconsistencies in the plagiarism policy scientific journals. The aims of this study was to analyze types of published articles on 'Plagiarism' available on PubMed over last two decades against a backdrop of the plagiarism policy of the journals publishing such articles.
methodsA literature search on PubMed (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) was made using the search term "plagiarism" from 01 January 1997 till 29 March 17. All publications having 'plagiarism' in the title formed the study group. The following were noted: types of articles published, ethical and plagiarism policy of the journal as available in the Instructions to authors and or in the journal home page.
resultsA total of 582 publications from 320 journals were studied. Editorials (165, 28.3%) and Letters to the Editor (159, 27.3%) formed the bulk. Research articles (56, 9.6%), Review articles (51, 8.7%) and Commentaries (47, 8%) formed the remainder. Detailed ethical guidelines were present in 221 (69%). Outline ethical guidelines only were present in 15 (4.7%) journals. 49 (15.3%) journals did not have any ethical guidelines. Detailed description of the policy on plagiarism was found in 80 (25%) journals. Only an outline description was found in 29 (9%) journals while a plagiarism policy/statement was totally absent in 176 (55%) journals.
conclusionThere is a need to have a well defined plagiarism policy/statement for all scholarly journals easily visible on their home pages on the internet and also in their Instructions to Authors.
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.