Similarity Index Analysis of the Manuscript: A Viewpoint.
Clicks: 189
ID: 77942
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Improving Quality
0.0
/100
Combines engagement data with AI-assessed academic quality
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
3.3
/100
11 views
11 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Abstract
Fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism have been considered the major academic/scientific misconduct in writing the research.1 In recent decades, plagiarism detection has become relatively easy with the evolution of newer software.2,3 Undoubtedly, many scientific journals evaluate the received manuscripts for plagiarism/similarity index and strictly refuse to consider manuscripts with higher similarity index for further publication process. In addition, if plagiarism is reported in the published articles, authors may pose various academic, professional, and legal consequences. This is definitely fruitful in producing originality of the articles with newer ideas/concepts in research design.
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (93 words).
| Reference Key |
gondivkar2019similaritythe
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Gondivkar, Shailesh M;Sarode, Sachin C;Gadbail, Amol R;Sarode, Gargi S;Patil, Shankargouda; |
| Journal | The journal of contemporary dental practice |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | URL not found |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.