| ..:: MENU ::..
|PEER REVIEW PROCESS|
|OPEN ACCESS POLICY|
|ISSN 2685-9769 (ONLINE)|
|ISSN 2089-080X (PRINT)|
The research article submitted to this online journal will be peer-reviewed. The accepted research articles will be available online (free download) following the journal peer-reviewing process. The language used in this Journal is Indonesia and English.
Reviewing a article written by a fellow scientist is a privilege. However, it is a time-consuming responsibility. Hence, JIK UMC, Journal for Health Sciences Editorial Board, authors, and audiences appreciate your willingness to accept this responsibility and your dedication. JIK UMC adheres to a double-blind peer-review process that is rapid and fair, and also ensures a high quality of articles published. In so doing, JIK UMC, Journal for Health Sciences needs reviewers who can provide insightful and helpful comments on submitted articles with a turn around time of about 4-6 weeks. Maintaining JIK UMC, Journal for Health Sciences as a scientific journal of high quality depends on reviewers with a high level of expertise and an ability to be objective, fair, and insightful in their evaluation of articles.
If JIK UMC Journal Editor-in-Chief has invited you to review a articles, please consider the following:
1. Reviewing article critically, but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the article to help authors improve their work
2. Reviewing multiple versions of a article as necessary
3. Providing all required information within established deadlines
4. Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the article for publication in the journal
5. Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review
6. Reporting possible research misconducts
7. Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the article for any reasons
8. Treating the article as a confidential document
9. Not making any use of the work described in the article.
10. Not communicating directly with authors, if somehow they identify the authors
11. Not identifying themselves to authors
12. Not passing on the assigned article to another reviewer
13. Ensuring that the article is of high quality and original work
14. Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned article is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge
15. Writing review report in English or Indonesia
16. Authoring a commentary for publication related to the reviewed article.
Here list of items that need to be reviewed:
1. Novelty of the topic
3. Scientific reliability
4. Valuable contribution to the science
5. Adding new aspects to the existed field of study
6. Ethical aspects
7. Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines
8. References provided to substantiate the content
9. Grammar, punctuation, and spelling
10. Scientific misconduct
| ..:: SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT ::..
| ..:: SERIAL NUMBER::..
|PEER REVIEW PROCESS|