Definitions & Scope

Plagiarism

Presenting another person’s ideas, processes, results, words, images, or data as one’s own without appropriate acknowledgment. This includes verbatim copying, close paraphrasing without citation, and appropriation of unique ideas or analyses.

Text Recycling (Self-Plagiarism)

Reusing substantial portions of one’s own previously published text or figures without citation or transparency. Acceptable reuse is limited to methodological descriptions that are difficult to rephrase; even then, prior work must be cited and overlap minimized.

Redundant/Duplicate Publication

Publishing the same or highly overlapping study in more than one venue, or submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.

Image/Data Manipulation

Adjustments that alter meaning or misrepresent data are misconduct. Legitimate global adjustments (e.g., brightness, contrast) must be applied uniformly and disclosed; original unprocessed files should be retained.

Idea Misappropriation

Using ideas, methods, or data learned through confidential means (e.g., peer review) without permission or citation. This is a serious breach of ethical conduct.

Responsibilities of Authors

• Submit only original work and cite all sources, including prior work by the authors.
• Limit text recycling to essential methodological passages and clearly cite the original.
• Disclose prior dissemination (e.g., preprints, theses, conference abstracts) and provide links where available.
• Retain raw data and original image files; be prepared to supply them on request.
• Ensure all co-authors have reviewed the manuscript and approve the final version for submission.

Editorial Screening & Similarity Checks

All submissions undergo editorial triage that includes similarity screening with established detection tools. The report supports, but does not replace, expert editorial judgment. Context matters: technical phrasing, standard methods, and references may legitimately match other sources.

Numerical “percentage thresholds” are not determinative. Editors assess the nature of the overlap, its location (e.g., introduction vs. results), and its impact on scientific claims.

Acceptable & Transparent Reuse

• Methods: Limited reuse of standard methodological text may be acceptable with proper citation; paraphrase where possible.
• Preprints: Manuscripts previously posted on recognized preprint servers are welcome; authors must link the preprint and update it with the final DOI after publication.
• Theses/Reports: Incorporation of material from institutional theses is permissible when the thesis is cited and any copyrighted third-party content is cleared.
• Figures & Tables: Reuse requires a permission or a compatible license; always provide credit lines and indicate changes.

Allegations & Investigations

Concerns may arise during screening, external peer review, or post-publication. APCR follows a fair, confidential, and stepwise process:

1. Preliminary Assessment: Editors examine evidence (similarity report, side-by-side comparisons) and determine if a formal inquiry is warranted.
2. Author Contact: Corresponding author receives a detailed query with examples and is invited to respond within a defined timeframe.
3. Editorial Determination: Based on the response, editors decide on next steps: correction, revision, rejection, or escalation.
4. Institutional Notification: For serious or unresolved cases, institutional research integrity offices or funders may be notified.
5. Record Maintenance: All decisions and communications are logged to ensure transparency and traceability.

Outcomes & Sanctions

Repeat or egregious violations may result in submission bans for a defined period and notification of employers, funders, or regulatory bodies as appropriate.

Reviewer & Editor Duties

• Report suspected overlap with published or unpublished work, providing citations or documentation.
• Maintain confidentiality; do not distribute manuscript materials.
• Declare conflicts of interest that could bias the assessment of plagiarism allegations.
• Adopt a constructive tone focused on improvement when overlap is minor and remediable.

Figures, Images & Clinical Materials

Reused images must include source credit and permission when required. Clinical images must be fully de-identified unless written patient consent allows identification. Composite images should be clearly demarcated; any enhancements must not change the scientific meaning. Editors may request original, time-stamped files to verify authenticity.

Data Citation & Availability

Authors must cite datasets, software, and protocols used in the study and provide a Data Availability Statement indicating where underlying data can be accessed. Failure to properly attribute data sources or to provide access in line with declared policies may be treated as a form of misrepresentation and can influence editorial outcomes.

Appeals

Authors may appeal plagiarism decisions by submitting a detailed response addressing each point of concern and providing supporting evidence (e.g., permissions, laboratory records). Appeals are reviewed by an editor not involved in the original decision and, if necessary, independent advisors. The appeal outcome—upheld, modified, or overturned—is communicated with reasoning.