Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika is a scientific journal written in Indonesian published every June and December, the manuscript submission process is opened every year. Manuscript submission is carried out using the double blind per review and editorial review method before being accepted and published. Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika only accepts manuscripts in the fields of: 

  1. Obstetrics (Pregnancy, Childbirth, Postpartum, Newborns, Family Planning, Community Midwifery and Reproduction)
  2. Nursing (Pediatric Nursing, Medical Surgery, Mental Health, Gerontics, Community, Emergency, Maternity and Management) 
  3. Public Health Sciences (Epidemiology of Communicable and Non-Communicable Diseases, Reproductive Health, Nutrition, Environmental Health, Public Policy) 
  4. Biomedics (Pharmacology, Microbiology, Pathophysiology)

 

 

Section Policies

Artikel

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Peer reviewers are entitled to provide the authors with some feedbacks to foster the quality of the published manuscript and editors for the decision making of editorial policy in accordance to their respective expertise.

Willingness 

Peer reviewers should inform the editor about the willingness to do a review on the manuscript to be published. If unwilling, peer reviewers must notify the editor.

Confidentiality

The reviewed manuscript is a confidential document. Communication with other parties without the author's permission is prohibited.

Standard Objectivity  

Peer reviewers must take hold on the principles of objectivity and avoiding personal criticism against the author of the manuscript during the review process. All comments must be accompanied by clear and supportive suggestions.

Reference Clarity  

Peer Reviewers are recommended to provide information to the authors of the research with the literature, or relevant case studies which have not been cited, having a substantial similarity or overlap with the manuscripts reviewed.

Conflicts of Interest

  • Peer reviewers are not allowed to use unpublished manuscript material for personal use without the prior written consent of the author, under any circumstances.
  • The information and ideas contained in the reviewed manuscript is confidential and should not be distributed or used for personal gain.
  • If having a conflict of interest for reasons of competition, collaboration, or other relationship with the author, institution or company involved in publishing, peer reviewers are not permitted to evaluate the related manuscript.

Double Blind Peer Review

In the process of review, the author and reviewer should not disclose any information about each other.


 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Publication Ethics

The following statements are based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika and its Publisher, Stikes Syedza Santika Padang follows the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). 

Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. Authors who submit papers to Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika attest that their work is original and unpublished, and is not under consideration for publication else where. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own; that it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works; and that they have disclosed actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it.

 

DUTIES OF EDITORS

Decision on the Publication of Articles 

The Editor in Chief of Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The Editor in Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and subjected to such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor in Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Review of Manuscripts

The Editor in Chief must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor/co-editor, who may make use of appropriate software to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and after passing this test, manuscript is forwarded to two referees for blind peer review, and each of whom will make a recommendation to publish the manuscript in its present form or to modify or to reject the same. The time required for each review stage is at least a month after the reviewer states willingness (each article has a different review stage, depending on the quality of the article). If the article is of very good or very poor quality, it is possible to get a decision faster.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.  

Fair play 

Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. 

Confidentiality 

The Editor in Chief/editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

 

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Promptness 

In case, any reviewer feels that it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then the same must be communicated to the editor, so that the same could be sent to any other reviewer.

Confidentiality

Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information.

Standards of Objectivity 

Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.  

Acknowledgement of Sources 

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.  

Conflict of Interest 

Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.  

 

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Reporting standards 

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.  

Data Access and Retention 

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.     

Originality and Plagiarism 

Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple Publications

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.  

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. 

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

The publisher & Jurnal Kesehatan Medika Saintika does not allow any form of plagiarism. Plagiarism is considered to be a serious breach of scientific ethics by the entire scientific community. Incidents of plagiarism in a manuscript or published paper whether detected or reported, will be dealt seriously. We constantly supportadvise and take suggestions from our Editorial and Reviewer Board on avoiding any malpractice of publication ethics.

 

Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are required to provide recommendations to help authors to improve the quality of published manuscripts and editor in determining the editorial policy, in accordance with their respective expertise.

1. Willingness 

Peer reviewers should inform the editor about the willingness to do a review on the manuscript to be published. If unwilling, peer reviewers must notify the editor.

2. Confidentiality

The reviewed manuscript is a confidential document. Communication with other parties without the author's permission is prohibited.

3. Standard Objectivity  

Peer reviewers must take hold on the principles of objectivity and avoiding personal criticism against the author of the manuscript during the review process. All comments must be accompanied by clear and supportive suggestions.

4. Reference Clarity 

Peer Reviewers are recommended to provide information to the authors of the research with the literature, or relevant case studies which have not been cited, having a substantial similarity or overlap with the manuscripts reviewed.

5. Conflicts of Interest

  • Peer reviewers are not allowed to use unpublished manuscript material for personal use without the prior written consent of the author, under any circumstances.
  • The information and ideas contained in the reviewed manuscript is confidential and should not be distributed or used for personal gain.
  • If having a conflict of interest for reasons of competition, collaboration, or other relationship with the author, institution or company involved in publishing, peer reviewers are not permitted to evaluate the related manuscript.

 

Editor

1. Publication Decision   

PDecision making of the published manuscript is the liability of the editor based on the policies and guidelines of the editorial board as well as based on compliance with legal requirements, such as not containing any information that harm others or containing slander, copyright disputes, and plagiarism. Communication with other editors or peer reviewers is acceptable to support the decision-making of the publication of the manuscript. Issuance decisions cannot be made by an editor based on personal considerations.

2. Fairness  

Editors must be able to evaluate a manuscript based on its scientific content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion and belief, ethnicity, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.

3. Confidentiality 

All information contained in the manuscript is confidential and should not be distributed except to the author, peer reviewers, prospective peer reviewers, editors, and publishers concerned.

4. Conflicts of Interest 

  • The editor is not allowed to use the unpublished manuscript material for personal use without the prior written consent of the author, under any circumstances.
  • The information and ideas contained in the text which are in the peer-review process is confidential and will not be distributed or used for personal benefit.
  • In case of having a conflict of interest for reasons of competition, collaboration, or other relationship with the author, institution or company involved in publishing, the editor is not permitted to evaluate the related texts. Thus, another editor board member should be involved in determining the issuance of the manuscript.
  • Editors must ensure that all parties involved in the review process and the publication of the manuscript declare a conflict of interest in the publication of a manuscript, as well as make corrections if a conflict of interest is revealed after the manuscript is published. If necessary, the editor can take appropriate action, such as publishing editorial statements or retraction of the manuscript.
  • • The share of non peer-reviewed written by the editor should be differentiated and easily identifiable in the scientific periodicals.

5. Involvement and Collaboration in the Investigation

Reports related to actions that do not comply with the ethics of publishing are justified, even many years after the manuscript was published. The report must be addressed by the editor. Editors should contact the author and establish communication with the institution or entity related to the report. Correction, retraction, or other editorial notes should be published as a form of official response to the report complaints.

6. Fatal Error on Published Manuscript

If the editor or others encountered a fatal error and inaccuracies in the published manuscript, the editor should immediately notify the author and request his/her correction or retraction.

 

Author

1. Writing standard

2. The author should comply with the following standards for preparing the manuscript to be published in the scientific periodicals:

  • Presenting accurate (using controlled and specific protocols/ procedures), reliable, repeatable, précised, and validated data.
  • Presenting sufficient details and references so as to ease other parties to repeat the research steps or treatment written in the text.
  • Differentiating personal opinion from accurate and objective scientific statement on the basis of references.

3. Data Access and Retention

Access of raw data should be granted for the purpose of editorial review.

4. Originality and Plagiarism

The manuscript should contain research or treatment of original nature. Any citation or adaptation of the previously published author, research, or treatment should be clearly stated. All forms of plagiarism should be subjected to rejection.

5. Multiple, Repetitive, or Simultaneous Publication

Multiple, repetitive, or simultaneous publication in other publications are things which are objectionable. The manuscript containing same information cannot be submitted or published in other scientific periodicals.

6. Sources of Information and References

Information from personal communication such as conversations, interviews, correspondence, and discussions or activities that are confidential as a manuscript jury or grant application or research funding schemes, should not be used without written permission from the original source or author.

7. Writing Agreement

The main author and all co-authors must approve the final version of the script and signed available submission form of the scientific periodicals

8. Hazardous Materials and Human Subjects and Animals

The use of hazardous materials or equipment should be written clearly in the text. All procedures related to human or animal to be approved by the appropriate institutional committee and the approval must be explained in the text. Human rights is an important thing to be fully realized by the author. Authors should clearly explain their actions and statements consent for receiving information of every human subject involved.

9. Conflict of Interest

Any indication of conflict of interest should be disclosed as clearly as possible. All financial supports, working relation, consultation, resources ownership, honoraria, paid expert revelation, patent application/registration, grant or other funding scheme should be clearly stated.

10. Fatal Errors in the Published Manuscript

The following actions should be taken if the writer encountered a fatal error in the published manuscript:

1. Immediately contact the editor of the publisher.

2. Immediately contact the editor of the publisher.