1. Overview of the Peer-Review Process
Jurnal Ilmiah Kesehatan (JIKA) applies a double-blind peer-review process to evaluate the scientific quality, originality, validity, relevance, and ethical integrity of submitted manuscripts. The process supports objective editorial decision-making and helps ensure that published articles meet appropriate scholarly standards in the health sciences.
Peer review is conducted by independent experts with relevant subject-matter expertise. Reviewers provide critical assessments and recommendations, while the final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor.
2. Initial Editorial Screening
Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine whether they are suitable for further consideration. The editorial team evaluates:
- Alignment with JIKA’s aims and scope.
- Compliance with the journal’s author guidelines and submission requirements.
- Completeness and clarity of the manuscript.
- Preliminary assessment of originality, scientific relevance, and research ethics documentation.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s fundamental requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected without external peer review.
Similarity screening: JIKA conducts Turnitin similarity screening after the peer-review and author-revision process has been completed and before the manuscript proceeds to copyediting. The maximum acceptable similarity index is 25%. The similarity index is an indicator for editorial assessment and does not, by itself, establish plagiarism.
3. Reviewer Selection and Invitation
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to appropriate editors, who identify and invite at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.
Reviewer selection takes into account subject-matter expertise, scholarly experience, availability, and potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers must disclose relevant conflicts and decline assignments where their impartiality may be compromised.
4. Double-Blind Peer Review
JIKA uses a double-blind peer-review system:
- Reviewers are not informed of the authors’ identities.
- Authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities.
- Manuscript files and editorial communications are handled to protect confidentiality.
Authors should ensure that their manuscripts and supplementary files do not unnecessarily disclose their identities during the review process.
5. Review Criteria
Reviewers assess manuscripts according to relevant criteria, including:
- Originality, novelty, and significance of the research.
- Relevance to the aims and scope of JIKA.
- Appropriateness and rigor of the research design and methodology.
- Adequacy of sampling, data collection, and statistical or analytical procedures.
- Clarity and accuracy of the results and their interpretation.
- Consistency between the findings, discussion, and conclusions.
- Compliance with applicable research ethics requirements.
- Accuracy, relevance, and currency of references.
- Overall scientific quality, presentation, and contribution to the health sciences.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
6. Review Recommendations and Editorial Decisions
After evaluating the reviewers’ reports, the editor determines the appropriate next step. Possible decisions include:
- Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication, subject to any remaining editorial requirements.
- Minor Revision: Limited changes are required before a final decision.
- Major Revision: Substantial changes are required, and the revised manuscript may undergo further review.
- Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s publication requirements.
Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but are not binding. The Editor-in-Chief or authorized editor retains responsibility for the final editorial decision.
When reviewer recommendations conflict substantially, the editor may seek additional expert advice.
7. Author Revision and Reassessment
Authors receiving a revision decision must respond to the reviewers’ and editor’s comments. A point-by-point response should explain how each comment has been addressed or provide a reasoned explanation when a suggested change is not adopted.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by the editor, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.
A revised manuscript is not automatically accepted. The editor determines whether the revisions adequately address the concerns raised and whether further revision or review is necessary.
8. Post-Review Similarity Screening and Copyediting
After peer review and the completion of the required author revisions, JIKA conducts Turnitin similarity screening before the manuscript proceeds to copyediting.
The maximum acceptable similarity index is 25%. Editorial assessment considers the context and nature of any overlap, including attribution, quotations, references, and potentially problematic text reuse. A similarity score alone does not determine whether plagiarism has occurred.
Manuscripts that raise unresolved originality or publication ethics concerns may be returned for clarification, subjected to further assessment, or rejected in accordance with JIKA’s Plagiarism Policy and Publication Malpractice Statement.
Manuscripts that have received the required editorial approval and completed the relevant checks may proceed to copyediting and subsequent production stages.
9. Confidentiality and Research Integrity
All participants in the peer-review process must maintain confidentiality, disclose relevant conflicts of interest, and avoid using unpublished manuscript information for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewers and editors must report suspected plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, manipulated peer review, or other potential research integrity concerns to the appropriate editorial authority.
Unpublished manuscript content must not be uploaded to generative AI tools or third-party services where doing so would breach confidentiality or JIKA’s applicable policies.
10. Relationship with Other JIKA Policies
This procedure should be read in conjunction with the following policies:
- Peer Review Policy
- Editorial Policy
- Authorship and Contributorship
- Research Ethics and Publication Policy
- Publication Malpractice Statement
- Plagiarism Policy
- Article Correction Notice
- Article Withdrawal and Retraction
JIKA reviews this procedure periodically to maintain consistency with its actual editorial workflow and publication ethics standards.
Peer-reviewer work scheme:
