Publication Ethics
Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (Journal of Nursing Scientific Sai Betik, JIK-SB) is a peer-reviewed electronic international journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer reviewer, and the publisher Department of Nursing of Poltekkes Kemenkes Tanjung Karang. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (JIK-SB) is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody scientific methods. Therefore, it is important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.
Departement of Nursing, Poltekkes Kemenkes Tanjung Karang as publisher of Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (Journal of Nursing Scientific Sai Betik, JIK-SB) takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial revenue have no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The Department of Nursing of Poltekkes Kemenkes Tanjung Karang and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Research misconduct refers to fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing articles by authors or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles published in scientific journals, editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.
In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them in resolving the complaint and addressing the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegations by the Editors. A submitted manuscript found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and linked to the original article.
The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.
If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all the co-authors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, an additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article, are sufficient.
Institutions are expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of scientific records. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct and taking necessary actions based on the evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (JIK-SB) will continue to fulfill its responsibilities to ensure the validity and integrity of the scientific record.
Publication decisions
The editor of the Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (JIK-SB) is 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 when making this decision.
Complaints and Appeals
Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (JIK-SB) has a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. Complaints will be clarified to the respected personnel with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to journal business processes, that is, editorial processes, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. Complaints will be processed according to the COPE guidelines. Complaints should be sent by email to media_ners@live.undip.ac.id.
Fair play
An editor may evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content at any time without regard to the 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 advisors, 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 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/herself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. They must not be shown to or discussed with others, except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively and systematically. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published papers 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 by the reviewers. 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 paper.
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. The underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, should be prepared to provide public access to such data if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
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
Authors 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 acknowledgement 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 and Contributorship of the Article
Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Where others 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 in 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.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed by the authors.
Fundamental errors in published work
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 accordingly.
Ethical Oversight
If the research involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, the authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the association or legal organization.
If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, the authors should clearly justify whether the data or information will be hidden securely.
Intelectual Property (Copyright Policy)
Journal policy on intellectual property or copyright is declared here:
https://ejurnal.poltekkes-tjk.ac.id/index.php/JKEP
Peer-Review Process Policy
The peer-review process/policy is declared as follows:
https://ejurnal.poltekkes-tjk.ac.id/index.php/JKEP
Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan Sai Betik (JIK-SB) accepts discussions and corrections of published articles by readers. In case the reader wishes to provide discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact the Editor-in-Chief by email and explain the discussions and corrections needed. If accepted (by the Editor-in-Chief), the discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as a Letter to the Editor. The Authors can reply to the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending a reply to the Editor-in-Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as a Reply to Letter to Editor.
.png){kind=logo}
