Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40159466›Full record

ArticleResearch integrity and peer review2025

How do oncology journals approach plagiarism? A website review.

Johanna Goldberg, Heather Snijdewind, Céline Soudant, Kendra Godwin, Robin O'Hanlon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research integrity and peer review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Johanna GoldbergMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Library, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA. goldbej2@mskcc.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1913-4722
Heather SnijdewindMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Library, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-8387-1093
Céline SoudantMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Library, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2562-8585
Kendra GodwinMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Library, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4232-5068
Robin O'HanlonMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Library, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0869-4118

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundJournals and publishers vary in the methods they use to detect plagiarism, when they implement these methods, and how they respond when plagiarism is suspected both before and after publication. This study aims to determine the policies and procedures of oncology journals for detecting and responding to suspected plagiarism in unpublished and published manuscripts.

methodsWe reviewed the websites of each journal in the Oncology category of Journal Citation Reports' Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) to determine how they detect and respond to suspected plagiarism. We collected data from each journal's website, or publisher webpages directly linked from journal websites, to ascertain what information about plagiarism policies and procedures is publicly available.

resultsThere are 241 extant oncology journals included in SCIE, of which 224 (92.95%) have a plagiarism policy or mention plagiarism. Text similarity software or other plagiarism checking methods are mentioned by 207 of these (92.41%, and 85.89% of the 241 total journals examined). These text similarity checks occur most frequently at manuscript submission or initial editorial review. Journal or journal-linked publisher webpages frequently report following guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (135, 56.01%).

conclusionsOncology journals report similar methods for identifying and responding to plagiarism, with some variation based on the breadth, location, and timing of plagiarism detection. Journal policies and procedures are often informed by guidance from professional organizations, like COPE.

Indexed as

Cancer researchEthicsPlagiarisePlagiarismPlagiarizeResearch misconductScholarly communicationsScientific misconductText similarity

Identifiers

PMID40159466
PMCPMC11956406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.