MahmudSAliI. Evolution of research on honesty and dishonesty in academic work: a bibliometric analysis of two decades. Ethics Behav. 2023;1:55–69.
2.
LazaridesMKGougoudiEPapanasN. Pitfalls and misconducts in medical writing. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2019;18(4):350–353.
3.
MarusicAWagerEUtrobicicARothsteinHSambunjakD. Interventions to prevent misconduct and promote integrity in research and publication. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4(4):MR000038.
4.
PhogatRManjunathBCSabbarwalBBhatnagarAXXXRAnandD. Misconduct in biomedical research: a meta-analysis and systematic review. J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent. 2023;13(3):185–193.
5.
ZhangMJianguoXCaihuaX, et al.Bibliometric review and mapping analysis of publication ethics research. Ethics Behav. 2024;2:1–13.
6.
LazaridesMLazaridouIZPapanasN. Bibliometric analysis: bridging informatics with science. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2023 Jan 29. Online ahead of print.
7.
BroomeM. Self-plagiarism: oxymoron, fair use, or scientific misconduct?Nurs Outlook. 2004;52(6):273–274.
8.
ChrousosGKalantaridouSMargiorisAGravanisA. The ‘self-plagiarism’ oxymoron: can one steal from oneself?Eur J Clin Invest. 2012;42(3):231–232.
9.
LüscherTF. The codex of science: honesty, precision, and truth and its violations. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(14):1018–1023.
NylennaMSimonsenS. Scientific misconduct: a new approach to prevention. Lancet. 2006;367(9526):1882–1884.
12.
BollandMAvenellAGreyA. Statistical techniques to assess publication integrity in groups of randomized trials: a narrative review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2024;170:111365.
13.
ThomasAde BruinGP. Plagiarism in South African management journals. S Af J Sci. 2015;111:1–2.
14.
SunYC. Do journal authors plagiarize? Using plagiarism detection software to uncover matching text across disciplines. J Engl Acad Purp. 2013;12(4):264–272.
15.
YuanZHLiuY. Research misconduct in hospitals is spreading: a bibliometric analysis of retracted papers from Chinese university-affiliated hospitals. J Data Inf Sci. 2023;8(4):84–101.
16.
HonigBBediA. The fox in the hen house: a critical examination of plagiarism among members of the academy of management. Acad Manage Learn Educ. 2012;11(1):101–123.
17.
BaždarićKBilić-ZulleLBruminiGPetrovečkiM. Prevalence of plagiarism in recent submissions to the Croatian medical journal. Sci Engin Ethics. 2012;18(2):223–239.
18.
PupovacV. The frequency of plagiarism identified by text matching software in scientific articles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientometrics. 2021;126(11):8981–9003.
ThurmanRHChervenakFAMcCulloughLBHalwaniSFarineD. Self-plagiarism: a misnomer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(1):91–93.
21.
PapanasNMikhailidisDP. Alice through the looking-glass: can we improve peer review?Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2022 Mar 7. Online ahead of print.
22.
LazaridesMKGeorgiadisGSPapanasN. Do's and don'ts for a good reviewer of scientific papers: a beginner's brief decalogue. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2020;19(3):227–229.
23.
DerraikJGBButlerÉMRerkasemK. Publishing without perishing: a guide to the successful reporting of clinical data. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2019;18(3):219–227.