Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan  Indonesia (JIKI) is a place to publish research results in accordance with the fields of nursing and health science. Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan  Indonesia (JIKI) is published by the Study Program of Nursing Science and Professional Nursing of the Faculty of Health Sciences, Muhammadiyah University of Tangerang. Published articles can come from academic writers, such as students and lecturers, health researchers, or nurses. Published articles are research results in surgical medical nursing, community and family nursing, basic nursing, maternity nursing, pediatric, gerontology, psychiatric nursing, and nursing management that have never been published elsewhere.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Each article entered in the Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan Indonesia will be sent to the editor's section through the Initial Review process. After that, the articles will be sent to peer reviewers to get the Double-Blind Peer Review Process. Then, the article will be returned to the author for revision. This process takes 3 to 5 months for the maximum time. In each text, peer reviewers will be assessed from a substantial and technical aspect. Peer reviews have expertise in media texts and analysis in accordance with the scientific field.

 

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.

 

Author Fee

Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)
Authors are not required to pay an Article Submission Fee as part of the submission process to contribute to review costs.

Fast-Track Review: 0.00 (IDR)
No needed the payment for the Fast-Track Review. Presently the JIKI does not apply for Fast-Track Review. 

Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR)

If this paper is accepted for publication, you will NOT be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publication costs.

 

Publications Ethics

The following statements describe the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article for Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan Indonesia (JIKI), i.e.: the author, the editor, and the peer reviewer.

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. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial works should be clearly identified as such.

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 data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

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 behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgment 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

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. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. The authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Ethical Approval

We require every research article submitted to JIKI to include a statement that the study obtained ethics approval (or a statement that it was not required), including the name of the ethics committee(s) or institutional review board(s), the number/ID of the approval(s), and a statement that participants gave informed consent before taking part.

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 their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

(These guidelines are based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines)

Duties of the Editorial Board 

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed JIKI 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 editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

(These guidelines are based on based COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines)

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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.

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.

Acknowledgment 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

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

(These guidelines are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines)

 

Publication Frequency

Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan Indonesia will publish 2 (two) times a year (March and September), that each issue number is at least 7 titles articles.

 

Plagiarism Check

Articles submitted to the Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan Indonesia will be filtered first to avoid plagiarism using software and Google-based search engines. The decision on the manuscript for the next process depends very much on the level of originality and the level of similarity of the articles received with other previously published articles.

 

Withdrawal of Manuscripts

The author is not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts, because the withdrawal is waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscript, money, and works invested by the publisher. If the author still requests withdrawal of his/her manuscript when the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process, the author will be punished with paying $20 per manuscript, as a withdrawal penalty to the publisher. However, it is unethical to withdraw a submitted manuscript from one journal if accepted by another journal. The withdrawal of the manuscript after the manuscript is accepted for publication, the author will be punished by paying US$550 per manuscript. Withdrawal of the manuscript is only allowed after the withdrawal penalty has been fully paid to the Publisher.

If the author doesn't agree to pay the penalty, the author and his/her affiliation will be blacklisted for publication in this journal. Even, his/her previously published articles will be removed from our online system.

 

Retraction

The paper published in Jurnal Ilmiah Keperawatan Indonesia [JIKI] will be considered to be retracted in the publication if:

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
  2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing and permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication).
  3. It constitutes plagiarism.
  4. It reports unethical research.