40 research outputs found
Prevalence and attitudes towards plagiarism among medical students
Cilj istraživanja. Utvrditi pojavnost i uÄestalost prisvajanja autorskoga vlasniÅ”tva u studenata medicine te ispitati stajaliÅ”ta o akademskoj Äestitosti i autorskom vlasniÅ”tvu. Ispitanici i metode. Istraživanje obuhvaÄa 295 studenata druge godine studija medicine (63% žene) tijekom tri akademske godine. Pojavnost plagiranja ispitana je na modelu studentskih seminarskih radova s pomoÄu programske potpore za otkrivanje prepisanog teksta. Studentske skupine u tri akademske godine razlikuju se u upozorenju o zabrani plagiranja. Prva skupina bila je upozorena da rad treba biti autorsko djelo, sljedeÄoj skupini istaknuta je i zabrana prepisivanja, a posljednja skupina upozorena je da Äe se radovi kontrolirati i prekrÅ”itelji kazniti. StajaliÅ”ta studenata o akademskoj neÄestitosti ispitana su s pomoÄu upitnika na primjeru priÄa u kojima se opisuju postupci: samoplagiranje, plagiranje uz privolu i bez privole autora, plagiranje od podreÄenog, ispitna prijevara i izdavanje nalaza bez uÄinjenog pregleda. Anonimnim upitnikom ispitana su i opÄa stajaliÅ”ta o autorskom vlasniÅ”tvu i akademskoj Äestitosti. Rezultati. Studenti su u svojim radovima prosjeÄno prepisivali 7% (5.95. percentila=084%) teksta. Na udio prepisanog teksta utjecalo je samo upozorenje o kontroli radova i posljediÄnoj kazni, upozoreni studenti prepisivali su znatno manje (2% naspram 17% i 21%, P<0,001). VeÄina studenata (6790%) sluÄajeve plagiranja smatra neispravnim no i opravdanim (2155%). VeÄina ispitanika sluÄaj samoplagiranja smatra ispravnim (65%) i opravdanim (75%). Äetvrtina ispitanika postupak prepisivanja na ispitu smatra ispravnim, polovina opravdanim i nepotrebnim kazniti. Približno polovina studenata poÄinila bi postupke opisane u priÄama (3966%) u odreÄenim okolnostima, a do 46% svjedoÄilo je sliÄnim postupcima u svojoj okolini. OpÄa stajaliÅ”ta o akademskoj Äestitosti u dvije treÄine studenata su prihvatljiva, ali se trebaju promatrati u svjetlu socijalno poželjnih odgovora.
ZakljuÄak. Plagiranje je prisutno u studenata medicine i samo se upozorenjem o kontroli radova nepristranim postupkom i prijetnjom kazne smanjuje udio prepisanog teksta. StajaliÅ”ta studenata medicine o povredama akademske Äestitosti zabrinjavajuÄa su i ukazuju na potrebu izobrazbe studenata o akademskoj Äestitosti.Aim. To determine the prevalence of plagiarism among medical students and investigate studentsā attitudes towards academic integrity and intellectual property. Subjects and methods. During the three academic years, 295 secondyear medical students (63% women) attending a mandatory course in Medical Informatics wrote an essay based on one of the four scientific articles offered as template. The essays were examined by WCopyfind software for plagiarism detection and the rates of plagiarism were calculated. The first generation of students was warned that the essay was expected to be an original paper, the second generation was strictly prohibited to copy, and the third generation received an additional warning that the essays would be examined by plagiarism detection software and the students who had plagiarized would be punished. Furthermore, studentsā attitudes towards six fictitious scenarios were investigated as follows: the case of self plagiarism three cases of plagiarism (copying an essay from a fellowstudent with and without his or her consent and a professor copying from his junior associate), cheating on exams, and issuing a false medical report. Finally, general attitudes towards intellectual property and academic integrity have been examined by a sixitem questionnaire.
Results. The average plagiarism rate was 7% (5th95th percentile=084%). Students warned about the use of plagiarism detection software and the consequent penalties plagiarized less (2% vs. 17% vs. 21%, P<0,001). Although plagiarism cases were considered inappropriate by majority of students (6790%, depending on case), a quarter to half of them found these acts justified. Majority of students found case of selfplagiarism appropriate (65%) and justified (75%). Quarter of students found the case of cheating appropriate and half of them thought it was justified and deserved no penalty. Approximately half of the students (3966%) would act as described in the scenarios, if the need be, and up to 46% witnessed similar cases in their environment. Attitudes towards academic integrity in twothirds of students could be described as appropriate. Discrepancy between student behavior and attitudes implied that some answers were given as socially desirable.
Conclusions. Plagiarism is present among medical students. If there is no plagiarism detection software and penalty threat, plagiarism among students may be expected. Medical studentsā attitudes toward academic integrity are disturbing. Students need clear guidelines and further education on academic and scientific integrity
Scientific integrity - the basis of existence and development of science
PoÅ”tenje u znanosti Äini sam temelj njezina postojanja. Znanstvenu je etiku teÅ”ko opisati i sažeto definirati. Sve Å”to se radi u znanosti potrebno je raditi poÅ”teno, biti objektivan, zatomiti želju za osobnom koriÅ”Äu i samopromidžbom, biti iskren u zakljuÄcima, pravedan prema suradnicima, biti ustrajan u toÄnosti i nikada ne mijenjati niti izmiÅ”ljati podatke, ne prisvajati sebi tuÄe intelektualno vlasniÅ”tvo, ma kako se to bezazlenim Äinilo. I najmanja sjena povrede znanstvene Äestitosti u znanstvenom radu sasvim obezvrjeÄuje rad i dovodi do nepovratna gubitka ugleda. I najmanji znanstveni doprinos vrijedan je dio u veliÄanstvenom mozaiku ljudske znanosti, ali samo ako je iskren i poÅ”ten. Svaki znanstvenik, pa i onaj Äiji jeznanstveni rad manji dio njegova svakodnevnog, rutinskog posla, tom radu mora pristupati Äista srca i otvorena uma.Science integrity is the very basis of the existence of science. The ethics of science is hard to describe and summarize. Everything in science should be done honestly and objectively. Scientists should suppress their vanity and self-importance, and be straight in concluding, fair to colleagues; diligent and accurate in data collecting and writing; should not misappropriate the work of the others, even if it may seem unimportant. Even the smallest shadow of scientific misconduct will devaluate scientific work and lead to the loss of respect. Even the smallest achievement in science is great and important in the magnificent kaleidoscope of human science only if it is fair and honest. Every scientist should be aware of this, and should work in science - one of the greatest achievements of mankind - wholeheartedly and open mind
Prevalence and attitudes towards plagiarism among medical students
Cilj istraživanja. Utvrditi pojavnost i uÄestalost prisvajanja autorskoga vlasniÅ”tva u studenata medicine te ispitati stajaliÅ”ta o akademskoj Äestitosti i autorskom vlasniÅ”tvu. Ispitanici i metode. Istraživanje obuhvaÄa 295 studenata druge godine studija medicine (63% žene) tijekom tri akademske godine. Pojavnost plagiranja ispitana je na modelu studentskih seminarskih radova s pomoÄu programske potpore za otkrivanje prepisanog teksta. Studentske skupine u tri akademske godine razlikuju se u upozorenju o zabrani plagiranja. Prva skupina bila je upozorena da rad treba biti autorsko djelo, sljedeÄoj skupini istaknuta je i zabrana prepisivanja, a posljednja skupina upozorena je da Äe se radovi kontrolirati i prekrÅ”itelji kazniti. StajaliÅ”ta studenata o akademskoj neÄestitosti ispitana su s pomoÄu upitnika na primjeru priÄa u kojima se opisuju postupci: samoplagiranje, plagiranje uz privolu i bez privole autora, plagiranje od podreÄenog, ispitna prijevara i izdavanje nalaza bez uÄinjenog pregleda. Anonimnim upitnikom ispitana su i opÄa stajaliÅ”ta o autorskom vlasniÅ”tvu i akademskoj Äestitosti. Rezultati. Studenti su u svojim radovima prosjeÄno prepisivali 7% (5.95. percentila=084%) teksta. Na udio prepisanog teksta utjecalo je samo upozorenje o kontroli radova i posljediÄnoj kazni, upozoreni studenti prepisivali su znatno manje (2% naspram 17% i 21%, P<0,001). VeÄina studenata (6790%) sluÄajeve plagiranja smatra neispravnim no i opravdanim (2155%). VeÄina ispitanika sluÄaj samoplagiranja smatra ispravnim (65%) i opravdanim (75%). Äetvrtina ispitanika postupak prepisivanja na ispitu smatra ispravnim, polovina opravdanim i nepotrebnim kazniti. Približno polovina studenata poÄinila bi postupke opisane u priÄama (3966%) u odreÄenim okolnostima, a do 46% svjedoÄilo je sliÄnim postupcima u svojoj okolini. OpÄa stajaliÅ”ta o akademskoj Äestitosti u dvije treÄine studenata su prihvatljiva, ali se trebaju promatrati u svjetlu socijalno poželjnih odgovora.
ZakljuÄak. Plagiranje je prisutno u studenata medicine i samo se upozorenjem o kontroli radova nepristranim postupkom i prijetnjom kazne smanjuje udio prepisanog teksta. StajaliÅ”ta studenata medicine o povredama akademske Äestitosti zabrinjavajuÄa su i ukazuju na potrebu izobrazbe studenata o akademskoj Äestitosti.Aim. To determine the prevalence of plagiarism among medical students and investigate studentsā attitudes towards academic integrity and intellectual property. Subjects and methods. During the three academic years, 295 secondyear medical students (63% women) attending a mandatory course in Medical Informatics wrote an essay based on one of the four scientific articles offered as template. The essays were examined by WCopyfind software for plagiarism detection and the rates of plagiarism were calculated. The first generation of students was warned that the essay was expected to be an original paper, the second generation was strictly prohibited to copy, and the third generation received an additional warning that the essays would be examined by plagiarism detection software and the students who had plagiarized would be punished. Furthermore, studentsā attitudes towards six fictitious scenarios were investigated as follows: the case of self plagiarism three cases of plagiarism (copying an essay from a fellowstudent with and without his or her consent and a professor copying from his junior associate), cheating on exams, and issuing a false medical report. Finally, general attitudes towards intellectual property and academic integrity have been examined by a sixitem questionnaire.
Results. The average plagiarism rate was 7% (5th95th percentile=084%). Students warned about the use of plagiarism detection software and the consequent penalties plagiarized less (2% vs. 17% vs. 21%, P<0,001). Although plagiarism cases were considered inappropriate by majority of students (6790%, depending on case), a quarter to half of them found these acts justified. Majority of students found case of selfplagiarism appropriate (65%) and justified (75%). Quarter of students found the case of cheating appropriate and half of them thought it was justified and deserved no penalty. Approximately half of the students (3966%) would act as described in the scenarios, if the need be, and up to 46% witnessed similar cases in their environment. Attitudes towards academic integrity in twothirds of students could be described as appropriate. Discrepancy between student behavior and attitudes implied that some answers were given as socially desirable.
Conclusions. Plagiarism is present among medical students. If there is no plagiarism detection software and penalty threat, plagiarism among students may be expected. Medical studentsā attitudes toward academic integrity are disturbing. Students need clear guidelines and further education on academic and scientific integrity
Patchwork plagiarism ā a jigsaw of stolen puzzle pieces
Plagiarism remains at the top in terms of interest to the scientific community. In its many vicious forms, patchwork plagiarism is characterized by numerous unresolved issues and often passes ābelow the radarā of editors and reviewers. The problem of detecting the complexity of misconduct has been partially resolved by plagiarism detection software. However, interpretation of relevant reports is not always obvious or easy. This article deals with plagiarism in general and patchwork plagiarism in particular, as well as related problems that editors must deal with to maintain the integrity of scientific journals
How do we handle self-plagiarism in submitted manuscripts?
Self-plagiarism is a controversial issue in scientific writing and presentation of research data. Unlike plagiarism, self-plagiarism is difficult to interpret as intellectual theft under the justification that one cannot steal from oneself. However, academics are concerned, as self-plagiarized papers mislead readers, do not contribute to science, and bring undeserved credit to authors. As such, it should be considered a form of scientific misconduct. In this paper, we explain different forms of self-plagiarism in scientific writing and then present good editorial policy toward questionable material. The importan-ce of dealing with self-plagiarism is emphasized by the recently published proposal of Text Recycling Guidelines by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
Lamellar body count as a diagnostic test in predicting neonatal respiratory distress syndrome
Aim To determine the lamellar body count (LBC) cutoff
value for fetal lung maturity and to evaluate the clinical
usefulness of LBC in predicting the severity of neonatal respiratory
distress syndrome (RDS).
Methods A prospective study was conducted from 2002
until 2010. LBC was estimated in uncentrifugated amniotic
fluid samples using Cell-Dyn 1800 analyzer. Amniotic fluid
samples were obtained by amniocentesis or by puncturing
embryonic membranes during cesarean section. The
presence of mild, moderate, and severe RDS was assessed
by neonatologist.
Results A total of 313 patients with singleton pregnancies
(24-41 weeks) were included in the study and 294 met
the inclusion criteria. RDS was diagnosed in 28 neonates ā
mild in 8, moderate in 10, and severe in 10. In premature
neonates (<37 gestational weeks), significant differences
in LBC were only found between the subgroup without
RDS and the group with moderate and the group with severe
RDS (P < 0.001). In all neonates, significant differences
were found between neonates without RDS and neonates
with RDS. Using LBC cutoff value of ā„20,000/Ī¼L, sensitivity,
specificity, and positive and negative predictive values
of LBC in determining mature fetal lungs were 96%, 88%,
45.6%, and 99.5%, respectively.
Conclusion This study suggests that LBC cutoff value of
ā„20,000/Ī¼L can predict pulmonary maturity and reduce
the risk of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome
Plagiarism as a violation of scientific and academic integrity
Plagiranje je neovlaÅ”teno preuzimanje tuÄih ideja, postupaka ili teksta bez odgovarajuÄe naznake s nakanom da se prikažu kao vlastita. Preuzimanje veÄ objavljenih vlastitih ideja ili preuzimanje
vlastitog veÄ objavljenog teksta prikazujuÄi ga novim i originalnim naziva se samoplagiranjem i smatra se jednako loÅ”im kao i plagiranje. UÄestalost plagiranja je u porastu, razvoj informacijsko-komunikacijske tehnologije olakÅ”ava neovlaÅ”teno preuzimanje teksta, no istovremeno, zahvaljujuÄi istoj tehnologiji, razvijaju se raÄunalni programi i mrežne usluge za otkrivanje plagiranja.
Za provjeru tekstova i Äinjenice jesu li oni plagirani postoje razliÄita programska rjeÅ”enja. VeÄina se zasniva na konkordanciji, tj. usporedbi teksta pri Äemu program iznalazi i oznaÄava podudarne dijelove teksta i izraÄunava njegov udio s obzirom na cijeli tekst. Neki od programa, osim Å”to usporeÄuju tekstove, pretražuju internet radi iznalaženja tekstova s podudarnim sadržajem. Svi programi mogu usporeÄivati tekstove napisane na istom jeziku; meÄujeziÄno pretraživanje nije moguÄe uz pomoÄ programske potpore. Primjeri programa su raÄunalni programi (WCopyfi nd) i mrežne usluge (eTBlast, CrossCheck). Prednost mrežne usluge je moguÄnost pronalaženja moguÄeg teksta izvornika. eTBlast je besplatna mrežna usluga za pronalaženje podudarnih i vrlo sliÄnih sažetaka znanstvenih radova (pretražuje i bazu podataka Medline) koja je poslužila kao temelj za izradbu baze podataka DĆ©jĆ vu. Mrežna usluga CrossCheck dostupna je samo Älanovima (akademske ustanove i Äasopisi), a
koriÅ”tenjem raÄunalnog algoritma za pronalaženje sliÄnosti Then cate tvrtke iParadigms (Oakland, CA, SAD) provjerava podudarnost teksta ispitivanog Älanka s cijelovitim tekstovima sadržanim u bazi podataka CrossCheck ustrojenom suradnjom uredniÅ”tva i izdavaÄa znanstvenih Äasopisa koji objavljene Älanke pridružuju bazi podataka, Å”to omoguÄuje nesmetano pretraživanje sadržaja zaÅ”tiÄenog pretplatom. Vrlo je važno prepoznati plagiranje i poduÄavati o njemu u akademskoj zajednici na svim nivoima obrazovanja. Urednici znanstvenih Äasopisa i znanstvenici trebaju se zajedno boriti protiv neetiÄnih istraživanja koja su suprotna znanstvenoj ideji i Å”tetna za znanstvenu i opÄu zajednicu, kritiÄki Äitati
i provjeravati znanstvenu publicistiku, prijavljivati plagiranje i ostale sumnjive postupke u istraživanjima uredniÅ”tvima Äasopisa i nadležnim tijelima.Plagiarism is unauthorized appropriation of other peopleās ideas, processes or text without giving correct credit and with intention to present it as own property. Appropriation of own published ideas or text and passing it as original is denominated self-plagiarism and considered as bad as plagiarism. The frequency of plagiarism is increasing and development of information and communication technologies facilitates it, but simultaneously, thanks to the same technology, plagiarism detection software is developing.
There are diff erent software solutions for checking plagiarism. Most of them are based on concordance, i.e., comparison of text where program tools isolate and mark correspondent parts of the
text and calculate its rate regarding the whole text. Several programs, besides comparing the texts, also search the Internet aiming for text with corresponding content. All programs can compare text written in the same language but translingual comparison with plagiarism detection software is not
yet possible. The software is available through computer programs (WCopyfi nd) or Web Services (eTBlast, CrossCheck). Their advantage is in the possibility of fi nding the original source paper.
eTBlast is the free of charge web based service for searching corresponding and highly similar scientific paper abstracts (it searches also Medline database), which served as the ground for constructing DĆ©jĆ vu database. Web based service CrossCheck is accessible only for members (academic institutions and journals) and by using computer similarity algorithm iThen cate of company iParadigms (Oakland, CA, USA), it checks accordance of the given text with the complete texts in the CrossCheck database. It is organized by collaboration of journal editorial boards and publishers who pass the published papers to the base and enable searching of content usually protected by subscription. The importance of recognizing and teaching plagiarism in the academic community at all levels of education is enormous. Scientific journal editors and scientists should fight together against unethical researches which are opposite to the scientific idea and harmful for scientific community and society, critically read and examine scientific publications, report plagiarism and other suspicious research
misconduct to journal editorial boards and institutional authorities