PUBLICATION ETHICS

SPIKesNas a peer-reviewed Prosiding. This Prosiding follows guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)  facing all aspects of publication ethics and, in particular, how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct.  This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this Prosiding, including the author, the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher STIKES & AKZI Karya Husada Kediri. Prosiding are dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of unethical behaviour is not acceptable, and the journals do not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

Prosiding adapts COPE to meet a high-quality standard of ethics for publisher, editors, authors, and reviewers. As an essential issue, publication ethics needs to be explained clearly to improve the quality of the research worldwide. In this part, we explain the standard for editors, authors, and reviewers. Publisher doesn’t have the right to interfere with the integrity of the contents and only support to publish in a timely manner.

The following are the useful links for our authors, reviewers and editors.

COPE 

COPE Flow-Charts

International standards for editors and authors

For Editors

  1. Based on the review report of the editorial review board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.
  2. Editors should be responsible for every article published in Jurnal Info Kesehatan.
  3. The editors may communicate with other editors or reviewers in making the final decision.
  4. An editor has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without looking to nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. He/she should decline his/her assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
  5. Editors need to ensure the document sent to the reviewer does not contain the information of the author, vice versa.
  6. Editors’ decision should be informed to authors accompanied by reviewers’ comments unless they contain offensive or libellous remarks.
  7. Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review the submission if these are well-reasoned and practicable.
  8. Editors and all staffs should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  9. Editors will be guided by COPE flowcharts if there is a suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

For Reviewers

Reviewers need to comment on ethical questions and possible research and publication misconduct.

  1. Reviewers will do the work in a timely manner and should notify the editor if they can not complete the work.
  2. Reviewers need to keep the confidentiality of the manuscript.
  3. Reviewers should not accept to review the manuscripts in which there is a potential conflict of interest between them and any of the authors.

For Authors

  1. Author(s) affirm that the material has not been previously published and that they have not trans­ferred elsewhere any rights to the article.
  2. Author(s) should ensure the originality of the work and they have properly cited others’ work in accordance of the references format.
  3. Author(s) should not engage in plagiarism nor self-plagiarism.
  4. Author(s) should ensure that they follow the authorship criteria that are taken from Jurnal Info Kesehatan that is explained in instruction for the author of  Jurnal Info Kesehatan.
  5. Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal.
  6. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  7. The author(s) haven’t suggested any personal information that may make the identity of the patient recognizable in any forms of description part, photograph or pedigree.
  8. Author(s) should give the editor the data and details of the work if there are suspicions of data falsification or fabrication.
  9. If at any point of time, the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.
  10. Authors of the journal should clarify everything that may cause a conflict of interests such as work, research expenses, consul­tant expenses, and intellectual property on the document of Jurnal Info Kesehatan form disclosure.

Publication decisions

The editors  are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor 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, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees 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 an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

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

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

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 behaviour 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. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

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.

Disclaimer

The Editors  make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in its publications. However, the  Editors  make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability for any purpose of the Content and disclaim all such representations and warranties whether express or implied to the maximum extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this publication are the views of the authors and are not necessarily the views of the Editors.