No plagiarism is allowed in a medical review paper; journals use similarity checks, and only original, cited writing passes.
What Editors Mean By Plagiarism Versus Similarity
Editors screen submissions for text matches using tools like iThenticate or Turnitin. A high similarity score is a signal, not a verdict. The report shows where phrasing overlaps with published sources, the web, or past submissions. Editors then read those matches in context. Borrowed wording without quotation marks and citation counts as plagiarism. Paraphrasing that mirrors the source too closely also fails, even when a citation appears.
Some overlap is normal in review papers. Standard terms, method names, and reference lists repeat. Quotations, when marked and cited, also add to the number. None of that gives permission to copy narrative sections. The goal stays simple: write your own synthesis in your own words and cite the trail that led you there.
Similarity Report Signals: What Counts And What Doesn’t
A quick way to read a report is to separate harmless matches from risky ones. Use the table below as a working map.
| Report Item | Risk Level | What To Do |
|---|---|---|
| Reference list, titles, standard phrases | Low | Leave as is; these lines often match across papers. |
| Short quotes with quotation marks and citation | Low | Keep quotes brief; check that the source is correct. |
| Long blocks copied from any source | High | Rewrite fully or quote sparingly; add citation or remove. |
| Close paraphrase that tracks a source | High | Reshape the passage; change structure, not just words, and cite. |
| Reused text from your own prior work | Medium to High | Rewrite and cite the prior article; note reuse in the cover letter. |
Why Review Papers See Higher Similarity Numbers
Review writing sums up many sources. That structure invites repeated terms and quoted lines. A block of references alone can raise the score. Tables that list drug names, gene symbols, or guideline steps also match prior publications. None of that is a problem when the prose around those elements is original and the sources are cited.
Risk rises when background sections lift sentences from abstracts or introductions across many papers. Another common trap is reusing the wording of a prior review from your group. The fix is to draft fresh text for each section, even when you tell a familiar story.
Zero Tolerance For Plagiarism, Not Zero Similarity
Journals do not grant a free pass to copy text. The bar is zero plagiarism. Similarity numbers vary by journal and field, but those numbers do not set a copying allowance. They only flag areas that need a closer read. Aim for the lowest score that still reflects accurate writing and complete citation.
How Much Plagiarism Is Allowed In A Medical Review Article: Journal Realities
No amount. Editors follow ethics guidance that rejects copied text and undisclosed text recycling. Similarity tools help triage, yet final calls rest on reading. Many editors screen out manuscripts with heavy blocks of matched prose even when the total score looks modest. Some journals share a rough threshold for screening, but they still examine the pattern of matches line by line.
Quoting, Paraphrasing, And Self-Plagiarism
Use quotes for short, distinctive lines and add a citation. Keep them rare. For anything else, paraphrase with a fresh structure and clear attribution. When you build on your own earlier article, cite it and write new text. Reusing prior figures, tables, or whole paragraphs without clear credit counts as self-plagiarism. If you need to reuse a figure, seek permission and state the source in the caption.
How Editors Read A Similarity Report
Editors often exclude small matches and the reference section, then study the remaining blocks. They look for clusters that map to one source, repeated use of the same sentences, and lifted phrasing in the abstract, intro, or conclusion sections. They also weigh overlap in the methods summary, since boilerplate here can match across studies. A review article earns trust when the matches left after these filters are few, short, and well cited.
Field Norms And Policy Anchors
Medical journals lean on shared policies. Editors rely on guidance from publication ethics bodies and set house rules that align with them. Many use iThenticate via Crossref Similarity Check in their editorial systems. Others use Turnitin. The tool does not decide; it only highlights text for human judgment.
Linking Your Practice To Published Rules
Two sources shape the ground rules that editors apply. The first is the ICMJE guidance on overlapping publications. The second is the Turnitin guide on the similarity score. Read both and align your drafting habits with those rules.
Practical Steps To Keep Your Review Original
Use these steps while drafting and before submission.
Plan The Structure Before You Read
Sketch sections and subheads first. A clear outline protects you from mirroring the structure of any single source.
Take Notes In Your Own Words
When reading, capture only key ideas and data points in a notes file. Avoid pasting sentences. Label each note with the source for easy citation later.
Draft From Notes, Not From Source PDFs
Write with the notes on screen and the sources closed. This breaks the habit of copying sentence rhythm or order.
Quote Sparingly And Precisely
Use quotation marks for a line that carries a distinctive turn of phrase. Place the citation right next to the quote. Keep quotes short.
Paraphrase With New Structure
Change the order of ideas and recombine facts across sources. Do not just swap words. Always add a citation.
Track Your Sources
Adopt a reference manager and tag every fact. Missing citations are a common reason for desk rejection.
Check Figures And Tables
Create your own visuals. If you must adapt one, obtain permission when needed and credit the origin in the legend. Avoid reusing the same table across papers.
Run A Pre-Submission Similarity Check
Use a reputable checker. Exclude the reference list and small matches, then review the remaining blocks line by line. Fix any copied or closely tracked text before submission.
Explain Legitimate Reuse
If you adapted parts of a protocol you published earlier, tell the editor in the cover letter and cite the source in the text.
Mark Direct Speech And Definitions
Distinct phrases from guidelines or landmark trials should either sit inside quotation marks with a citation or be rewritten from scratch. Do not hide borrowed language in a paraphrase.
Write The Abstract Last
The abstract is a common match hotspot. Draft it after the main text so your summary reflects your own structure and voice.
What A “Good” Similarity Report Looks Like
A clean report shows small, scattered matches, mostly from your references and routine phrases. The abstract and introduction contain new sentences. The discussion reads like your voice. Any quotes are brief and tied to citations. No section shows a solid block of color from one prior source.
Common Traps That Inflate Similarity
Copying Abstract Phrases
Abstracts get indexed widely, so copied lines light up the report. Summarize findings in fresh language.
Recycling Old Introductions
Dropping a past intro into a new paper feels fast and leads to rejection. Build a new narrative each time.
Overusing Stock Sentences
Long strings of stock wording add up. Trim boilerplate and vary sentence starts.
Table Dumps From Guidelines
Copying rows word for word triggers high matches. Reframe lists into your own summary or redesign the table.
Permissions, Preprints, And Secondary Publication
Preprints are common in biomedicine. Posting a draft online does not give license to reuse that same text in a journal article without clear notes. When a secondary publication is justified, journals expect notice to both editors, respect for the primary version, a different audience, faithful reproduction of the data and interpretation, and a clear note that points to the original source. That path is narrow and rests on transparency.
Policy Snapshots: Overlap Types And Likely Actions
Use this table as a quick guide to the patterns editors flag and how they often respond.
| Overlap Type | Risk | Typical Action |
|---|---|---|
| Short quote with citation | Low | Proceed; keep quotes limited and precise. |
| Reference and methods boilerplate | Low to Medium | Proceed after filters; editors read the rest closely. |
| Close paraphrase across many lines | High | Revise before review or face rejection. |
| Copied paragraph without quotes | High | Desk rejection or retraction if discovered after publication. |
| Reused figure or table without credit | High | Request for removal or permissions; can trigger rejection. |
Ethics Bodies And Tools You Will See In Policies
You will often see references to ICMJE, COPE, and WAME. These groups post guidance that journals adopt and cite. You will also see Crossref Similarity Check, iThenticate, and Turnitin named in instructions for authors. Knowing these names helps you read policy pages and choose the right steps when a report shows problems.
What To Do If Your Report Looks High
Start with the largest blocks. Rewrite those passages with a new structure and add citations. Remove any copied lines. Then rerun the check and repeat the pass. If overlap remains for a good reason, explain it in your cover letter. Editors respond well to clear notes that point to the fixes you made.
Clear Takeaway For Authors
No plagiarism is allowed. Similarity tools flag matches; editors decide. Write fresh text, cite well, limit quotes, manage reuse with transparency, and your medical review stands on solid ground.
Further reading: see the ICMJE advice on overlapping publications and the COPE guideposts that journals cite when handling duplicate or recycled text.