Peer Review Policy
The Archives of Surgery and Clinical Research (ASCR; ISSN: 2576-9537) is committed to originality and proper attribution. This policy explains how we define and detect plagiarism and text recycling, how we evaluate similarity reports, what we consider acceptable reuse, and what actions we take when overlap is identified before or after publication.
Definitions
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, words, images, or data without appropriate credit, permission, or justification. Text recycling (sometimes called self-plagiarism) refers to reuse of one’s own previously published material without disclosure or proper citation. Redundant/duplicate publication occurs when substantially similar content is published in multiple venues without transparent cross-referencing. Image/data duplication includes reuse of figures, panels, gels, micrographs, charts, or datasets across different manuscripts without acknowledgement, permission, or clear labeling, regardless of whether the images are cropped, rotated, or contrast-adjusted.
Why it matters
- Plagiarism misleads readers about authorship and undermines trust in the scholarly record.
- Duplicate publication distorts meta-analyses and clinical guidance by counting the same findings multiple times.
- Image and data reuse can conceal methodological issues and bias clinical inferences.
Examples & Types of Overlap
| Type | Description | Typical Action |
|---|---|---|
| Verbatim text without quotation/citation | Sentences/paragraphs copied from a source | Reject or require rewrite with proper citation |
| Close paraphrasing | Structure and ideas copied with minor word changes | Reject/rewrite; add citations; educate authors on paraphrasing |
| Improper reuse of methods text | Large blocks copied from prior papers | Allow limited standardized phrases; otherwise rewrite and cite |
| Self-plagiarism | Authors reuse their own published text/figures without disclosure | Require citation/cross-reference; may reject for redundancy |
| Duplicate submission/publication | Substantially similar manuscripts submitted to multiple journals or republished | Reject; notify other journal; retract if discovered post-publication |
| Image/data duplication | Reused panels or datasets presented as new | Request raw data; reject/retract if misleading |
| Translated duplication | Publishing a translation of the same work without disclosure | Reject or require transparent notice and cross-linking |
Screening Workflow
ASCR screens submissions for textual and image overlap at multiple points: initial submission, revision, and pre-acceptance. Editors interpret similarity reports in context, focusing on the nature and location of matches rather than a single numeric percentage. We use recognized databases and tools for text similarity and, when relevant, image forensics. Reviewers may also flag concerns.
What we examine
- Abstract, Introduction, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions for non-quoted overlap.
- Methods for excessive or unexplained copying (limited standard phrases may be acceptable).
- Figures/tables for panel reuse across submissions and articles; legends for transparency.
- References for incorrect or missing attributions when text is similar to cited sources.
Editorial triage responses
- Minor overlap: Request revision and improved citation/quotation.
- Moderate overlap: Return to authors for substantive rewrite; pause peer review.
- Major/intentional overlap: Reject and, if necessary, notify institutions or prior publishers.
How We Interpret Similarity Reports
ASCR does not enforce a single numeric threshold. Instead, editors evaluate qualitative patterns:
- Acceptable overlap: References, standardized method descriptions, boilerplate ethics/consent statements, and brief definitions—if cited or quoted where needed.
- Concerning overlap: Consecutive sentences or paragraphs in the narrative sections; reuse of interpretation or conclusions; figures/tables reused without clear credit lines.
- Unacceptable overlap: Copy-paste of results or discussion; images/data presented as new when previously published; duplicate submission of essentially the same work.
Quick guide for authors
| Section | Typical tolerance | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Abstract | Very low | Write fresh text; do not reuse prior abstracts verbatim. |
| Introduction | Low | Paraphrase and cite; avoid copying background text. |
| Methods | Moderate | Use concise, standard phrasing with citations; avoid long blocks of identical text. |
| Results/Discussion | Very low | Original narrative required; cite prior work when comparing. |
| Figures/Tables | Case-by-case | Provide credit lines and permissions; label reused or adapted items. |
Text Recycling (Self-Plagiarism) & Redundancy
Reusing your own words or figures without disclosure can mislead readers and inflate the literature. Limited reuse may be acceptable when it improves clarity (e.g., standardized methods) and is accompanied by citation to the prior source and, where appropriate, quotation marks. Submissions that substantially overlap with previously published or under-review work will be rejected for redundancy.
- Preprints should be cited with their DOI, and differences from the version of record should be summarized where material.
- Theses or dissertations: clearly cite and reframe content for the journal audience; verify any institutional or prior-publisher restrictions.
- Conference papers: disclose prior dissemination; submissions must provide significant new material (e.g., expanded dataset, new analyses, longer follow-up).
Figures, Images & Data Reuse
Reusing figures or datasets without disclosure is unacceptable. When reusing or adapting a figure, include a credit line that specifies the original source and license or permission status. Composite figures must show demarcations and labels. Authors must retain original, unprocessed images and raw data and provide them upon request during review or investigation.
AI-Assisted Writing & Citation Integrity
Authors may use computational tools for language editing or grammar assistance, but remain fully responsible for originality, accuracy, and appropriate citation. Do not submit text generated from tools that fabricate references or plagiarize source material. Disclose substantive use of such tools in the manuscript’s acknowledgments or methods. Confidential manuscript content must not be entered into systems that store or reuse data. Generated images must not simulate clinical findings or obscure data provenance.
Responsibilities
Authors
- Write original text and provide appropriate citations and quotations.
- Disclose related submissions and publications; cite preprints and prior articles.
- Provide permissions and credit lines for third-party materials.
- Retain raw data and original images for verification.
Editors & Reviewers
- Interpret similarity reports in context; avoid reliance on a single percentage.
- Request clarifications, rewrites, or raw data where overlap is suspected.
- Maintain confidentiality and declare conflicts before engaging with a manuscript.
- Recommend corrective actions proportionate to the severity of overlap.
Actions & Sanctions
Outcomes depend on severity, intent, and the section affected:
- Minor issues (e.g., inadequate paraphrasing in background): request revision and improved citation/quotation.
- Moderate issues (e.g., repeated close paraphrasing across sections): reject or require major rewrite; educate authors; consider institutional notification for repeated offenses.
- Serious misconduct (e.g., results copied, data/figure duplication presented as new, duplicate submission): reject; impose submission bans for a defined period; notify institutions and/or funders; if published, issue correction, expression of concern, or retraction with a DOI-linked notice.
All decisions are documented. Where the scholarly record is affected, we publish formal notices interlinked with the affected article.
Investigations, Corrections & Appeals
When overlap is flagged, editors review reports and evidence, invite an author response, and, if needed, request raw data or institutional input. We follow a documented, time-bounded process designed to be fair and confidential. If an error is confirmed, we correct the record promptly. Authors may appeal editorial decisions with a concise, evidence-based rationale; appeals are handled by a senior editor not involved in the original decision.
Good Practices for Avoiding Plagiarism
- Draft in your own words from notes rather than copying from sources.
- Use quotation marks for verbatim phrases and provide citations with page or section numbers where relevant.
- Paraphrase with genuine synthesis and new structure; do not rely on synonym swapping.
- Keep a reference manager and note IDs/DOIs to reduce citation errors.
- Mark pasted notes clearly to avoid accidental carry-over into the final draft.
- Credit the origin of ideas, data, figures, and protocols—even if adapted.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a numeric similarity threshold for automatic rejection?
No. We examine where and how overlap appears. Even small percentages can be problematic if they occur in results or discussion; larger percentages may be acceptable when arising from references or standardized methods with proper citation.
Can I reuse my previously published methods text?
Limited reuse is acceptable if you cite the original source and rewrite for the new context. Avoid copying long blocks. Consider linking to protocols or prior publications for detailed procedures.
Does posting a preprint count as prior publication?
No. Preprints are allowed, but must be disclosed and cited. Summarize substantive changes between the preprint and the journal article when relevant.
Can I reuse a figure from my thesis or a conference abstract?
Yes, if you hold the rights and provide a credit line, or if the prior publisher allows it. If rights are unclear, obtain permission or recreate the figure with new graphics and a citation.
How are image duplications handled?
We may request original, unprocessed files. If duplication is inadvertent and does not alter conclusions, a correction may suffice; otherwise, rejection or retraction can occur.
What happens if plagiarism is found after publication?
We assess the extent and impact. Outcomes include correction (with attribution), expression of concern, or retraction. Notices are assigned DOIs and linked to the article.
Contact
Questions about this policy or to report suspected plagiarism: ethics@clinsurgeryjournal.com · Editorial queries: editorial@clinsurgeryjournal.com