Plagiarism in dentistry - a systematic review

Taseef Hasan Farook, John Radford, Mohammad Khursheed Alam (Lead / Corresponding author), Nafij Bin Jamayet (Lead / Corresponding author)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Following a survey of the literature, a systematic review was carried out with the aim of answering the following questions: 1) What is 'acceptable plagiarism'?; 2) Who carries out plagiarism?; 3) What factors could encourage plagiarism?; 4) How can plagiarism be managed?

Data source and selection: Following PRISMA guidelines, data were gathered by searching Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science. After removal of duplicates, 345 titles were identified. Then, having satisfied a priori eligibility criteria, 29 papers were interrogated. The quality of relevant papers (n = 23) was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal Tool.

Data extraction: There was no clear threshold as to what is 'acceptable plagiarism'. Despite this lack of clarity, it is argued consistently that males, and those who wrote in a language that is not their mother tongue, were more likely to plagiarise.

Conclusion: Plagiarism is all but inescapable due to various reasons: 1) there is no agreed threshold as to what is 'acceptable plagiarism'; 2) the internet; 3) institutional; and 4) societal expectations. Plagiarism could be mitigated in the student domain by grammar support and, for example, non-written submissions such as presenting work by video. Academic fraud is fundamentally undermined by valuing original and creative scholarship and sound ethical principles.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages7
JournalBritish Dental Journal
Early online date20 Oct 2020
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 20 Oct 2020

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Plagiarism in dentistry - a systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this