Plagiarism Screening Policy

Al-Rafidain Dental Journal adheres to COPE best practices to ensure originality and integrity in all submissions. This policy applies to all authors, reviewers, and editorial staff.

  1. Definitions

Plagiarism: Unattributed copying of words, ideas, data, figures, or structure from any source.

Self-plagiarism: Reuse of substantial portions of one’s previously published work without citation.

Mosaic plagiarism: Interweaving content from multiple sources without proper attribution.

Text recycling: Standard methodology descriptions may be reused only if properly cited and disclosed.

Accidental plagiarism: Unintentional omission of citation; still unacceptable.

  1. Detection

All manuscripts are screened using iThenticate.

Editors review similarity reports, focusing on originality and excluding references and technical terms.

AI-generated content is checked; manuscripts with >5% AI content are returned for revision.

Manuscripts containing hidden or replaced flags are immediately rejected.

  1. Plagiarism Thresholds

Acceptable similarity: typically <15–20% (excluding references).

Verbatim copying without attribution is zero-tolerance.

Overlaps with prior work must be cited and explained in the cover letter.

Manuscripts exceeding thresholds may be rejected outright.

  1. Procedures & Sanctions

Pre-publication:

Minor plagiarism (within threshold, cited properly): revise and resubmit

Moderate/severe plagiarism: immediate rejection; author notified; option to appeal

Post-publication:

Investigated according to COPE flowcharts

Outcomes may include: Correction, Expression of Concern, Retraction

Institutions or funders may be notified

Possible temporary submission ban

  1. Author Responsibilities

Submit only original work not under consideration elsewhere

Cite all sources accurately; clearly paraphrase or quote

Disclose any related prior work or submissions

Submit a signed Originality Statement

  1. Editorial & Reviewer Responsibilities

Editors ensure screening is performed and plagiarism is handled confidentially and transparently

Reviewers must alert editors if plagiarism is suspected, providing details

  1. Transparency & Appeals

Authors are given an opportunity to respond to plagiarism concerns

Appeals can be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief; unresolved cases may escalate to the journal ethics committee

  1. Communication & Record-Keeping

Detailed records are maintained for all plagiarism cases

Confidentiality and impartiality are strictly observed

  1. Policy Review

This policy is reviewed annually and updated in line with COPE guidelines and journal best practices