Jurnal Kedokteran Qanun Medika’s Publication Ethics
A publication reflects the quality of its author/s with his/her or their related institution. By that reason, it is important for a journal to have an ethical publication standard for all parties involved in the act of publishing. The parties here are: author, journal editors, reviewers, and publisher.
Jurnal Kedokteran Qanun Medika of Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Muhammadiyah Surabaya is strongly committed to ensuring that any advertising, reprint, or commercial revenues have no influence on the editorial decision. Below are the standards that comply with COPE practices in order to establish a high quality standard of ethics for journal publication.
The Chief Editor of Jurnal Kedokteran Qanun Medika is responsible for deciding as to which of the articles submitted should be reviewed and published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such a decision. The editors must seriously prevent libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors are responsible to consider all the submitted manuscripts in reasonable time frame.
Editors, with their expertise and fair judgment are responsible to accept or reject the manuscripts. They are to build a good communication with authors in regards to the manuscripts publication. The final decision will be accompanied by the reviewer’s comment.
Fair play: An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual contents without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).
Confidentiality: Editors are to make sure no private information of authors are included in the manuscript sent to reviewers. Editors should ensure the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript and not to disclose any information about the manuscript under consideration to other parties
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. 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). Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
A reviewer task is to assist the editor-in-chief in making an editorial decision and editorial communications with the author(s). Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review research reported in a manuscript, or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor-in-chief and excuse himself/herself from the review process. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by relevant citations.
Reviewer should also call to the editor-in-chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which he/she has personal knowledge. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without an expressed written consent of the author(s). Privileged information or ideas obtained through a peer review must be kept confidential and not utilized for personal advantages. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.
Author’s main obligation is to deliver accurate and complete details of the research performed. The research data should contain sufficient information on the related subject. Authors should ensure the originality of their work and that no fraud nor fabrication is involved in their manuscript. Authors should guarantee that the article has not been published previously or is not being evaluated for publication elsewhere. Authors should ensure that their works do not contain any unlawful statements and any comment that may violate the law.
Data and citations should be represented accurately in the paper. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Plagiarism takes many forms, from using another’s paper as the author’s own paper to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), or claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is intolerable.
An author should not in general publish a manuscript 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. 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(s). Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study, and seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.
All authors should disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest. 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 Qanun Medika’s chief editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
For more detailed information, visit http://publicationethics.org/
Conflict of Interest Policy
Authors, Editors and Reviewers are expected to follow the guidelines in compliance with COPE practices:
- Authors should clearly inform their source of financial support -institution, private, and/or corporate- for their research
- Should the author and editor of Qanun Medika have a relationship which may lead to an unfair evaluation another editor will be appointed instead.
- Reviewers should be aware for any appearance of conflict of interest when receive a manuscript for evaluation and are required to promptly return the manuscript to editor, informing the conflict of interest issue.