title: Screening for self-plagiarism in a subspecialty-versus-general imaging journal using iThenticate.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Self-plagiarism is a form of research misconduct that can dilute the credibility and reputation of a scientific journal, as well as the represented specialty. Journal editors are aware of this problem when reviewing submissions and use on-line plagiarism-analysis programs to facilitate detection. The American Journal of Neuroradiology (AJNR) uses iThenticate to screen several submitted original research manuscripts selected for review per issue and retrospectively assesses 3 issues per year. The prevalence of self-plagiarism in AJNR was compared with that in Radiology; the necessity and cost of more extensive screening in AJNR were evaluated.
  
  
  METHODS
  The self-duplication rate in AJNR original research articles was compared with that in Radiology, a general imaging journal that screens all submitted original research manuscripts selected for review by using iThenticate. The rate of self-duplication in original research articles from 2 randomly selected 2012 AJNR issues was compared with the rate in the prior year to gauge the need for more extensive screening. A cost analysis of screening all submitted original research manuscripts selected for review by using iThenticate was performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Using an empiric 15% single-source duplication threshold, we found that the rate of significant self-plagiarism in original research articles was low for both journals. While AJNR had more articles exceeding this threshold, most instances were insignificant. Analyzing 2 randomly chosen issues of AJNR for single-source duplication of >15% in original research articles yielded no significant differences compared with an entire year. The approximate annual cost of screening all submitted original research manuscripts selected for review was US $6800.00.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  While the rate of self-plagiarism was low in AJNR and similar to that in Radiology, its potential cost in negative impact on AJNR and the subspecialty of neuroradiology justifies the costs of broader screening.
authors: From the Department of Radiology (A.U.K.), Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California.
authors: A U
authors: AU
authors: Kalnins
authors: American Journal of Neuroradiology (K.H., M.C.), Oak Brook, Illinois.
authors: K
authors: K
authors: Halm
authors: American Journal of Neuroradiology (K.H., M.C.), Oak Brook, Illinois Department of Radiology (M.C.), University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Castillo@med.unc.edu.
authors: M
authors: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2960-1064
authors: M
authors: Castillo
mesh_terms: D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D015713:Duplicate Publications as Topic; D006801:Humans; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards; D015871:Scientific Misconduct; D012984:Software / Q000191:economics
references: Radiology. 2008 Jun;247(3):605-7
references: 18487529
references: Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi. 2014 Oct;22(10):781-91
references: 25558501
references: Sci Eng Ethics. 2002 Oct;8(4):543-4
references: 12501723
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Nov 15;102(46):16569-72
references: 16275915
references: PLoS Med. 2010 Aug 17;7(8):e1000318
references: 20808955
references: Fed Regist. 2005 May 17;70(94):28369-400
references: 15898182