Peer Review Process

All manuscripts entered will go through editorial reviews and blind peer reviews. Manuscripts that do not meet the criteria will be rejected without going through an external review. Manuscripts deemed appropriate for inclusion in the Jurnal Kesehatan dr. Soebandi (JKDS) was sent for formal review. Usually two experts review each paper, but they might be for better research so more specific advice related to statistics or techniques is needed. Based on the reviewers' comments, the editor will then accept or reject the paper with the following conditions:

  1. Accepted and published, with or without editor revisions
  2. Invite writers to revise their manuscripts
  3. Refusing articles directly, usually due to lack of originality, inadequate conceptual progress or major technical issues and / or interpretations.

Any changes made to the original text will be clearly stated for review by the author. The author must carefully examine the structure of the sentence, the completeness and accuracy of the text, references, tables and graphic content of the revised text. The editor will have a final decision about accepting or rejecting the text. The Editorial Board has the right to edit articles about all aspects of style, format and clarity. Manuscripts with excessive errors in any aspect, such as spelling or punctuation, the number of words will be returned to the author for revision before being sent back or can be completely rejected. JKDS welcomes the recommendations of reviewers regarding editing prospective texts, but in the case of contradictory suggestions from reviewers, the editor will make a final decision about the action.

The editor will evaluate the report from each reviewer, relevant comments made by the author, and other information that may not be available to either party before reaching a decision. JKDS's primary responsibility is for readers and the scientific community in general, and in deciding the best way to serve them, we must assess the validity and reliability of each manuscript for many others who are also being considered. We can return to reviewers for further suggestions, especially in cases where they disagree with each other, or where the authors believe they have been misunderstood at certain points. Therefore, reviewers must be willing to provide follow-up advice when asked. The editor acknowledges that reviewers may be reluctant to be drawn into prolonged disputes and will maintain the minimum consultation that we deem necessary to provide a fair audience for the author. When reviewers agree to rate the paper, the editor considers this as a commitment to review the next revision if necessary and the editor will not send the paper back to the reviewer if it appears the author has not made a serious effort to resolve the initial problem. JKDS takes comments from readers and writers seriously, especially editors are very reluctant to ignore technical criticism. In cases where only one reviewer opposes publication, the editor can consult with other reviewers about whether he is applying too critical a standard. Editors can sometimes bring additional reviewers to resolve disputes but we prefer to avoid doing so unless there are special problems, such as specialist technical problems.