Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Journal of Community Empowerment for Health (JCOEMPH) publishes articles, review and short communications in the fields of community empowerment, community service and community health services as its main scope. JCOEMPH covers community medicine which includes: health care, social medicine, epidemiology, medical anthropology, occupational medicine, community-based education, community service and disaster response. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. 

The following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Publication Ethics.

Complaints and Appeals

JCOEMPH will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to a respected person with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline. The complaint cases should be sent by email to jcoemph.fk@ugm.ac.id.

Authorship and Contributorship

All listed authors must have made a substantial contribution to the work and must approve the final submitted manuscript. Authorship should be based on significant involvement in the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or writing of the manuscript.

In cases of authorship disputes, such as undisclosed changes in authorship, disputed contributions, duplicate submissions, or suspected misconduct (e.g., false authorship claims or omission of legitimate authors), the editor reserves the right to reject the manuscript to avoid potential ethical conflicts.

If the paper has already been published and an authorship issue is later identified, the journal will follow COPE guidelines to determine the appropriate course of action, which may include a correction, an expression of concern, or retraction.

Conflict of interest/competing interest

JCOEMPH expects author reviewers, editors, and readers to declare all competing interests including any financial support, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations related to the material discussed in the manuscript. At the end of submitted manuscript, authors must include a “Conflict of interest” section, listing all competing interests. Where authors have no competing interests, the statement should read “The author(s) declare(s) that they have no competing interests”. The editor may ask for further information relating to competing interests.

Allegation of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article by authors, or in reporting research results. In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

Ethical Oversight 

If the research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from association or legal organization. 

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not. 

Intellectual property

JCOEMPH requires all authors to submit a signed Statement of Originality as part of the submission process. By signing this form, authors declare that the manuscript is their original work and has not been previously published or submitted elsewhere, the work does not violate any copyright or other intellectual property rights, and all listed authors have approved the manuscript and agree to its submission. The form can be downloaded on the website and send through supplementary files or journal’s email.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility

Authors are encouraged to retain and, where appropriate, share the raw data that support the findings of their research. Upon editorial request, authors may be required to provide access to such data for the purposes of review or verification.

Manuscripts should describe methods in sufficient detail to allow other researchers to replicate the study. While data sharing is not mandatory, authors are encouraged to make their data available through supplementary files or upon reasonable request, in accordance with ethical and legal considerations.

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 ëopinioní 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.

  • Originality and plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ëpassing offí anotherís paper as the authorís own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of anotherís paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  • 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 

  • 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. 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.

  • 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 which 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.

Duties of the Editorial Board 

  • Publication decisions: The editor of a peer-reviewed Journal of Community Empowerment for Health 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 member 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.

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.

Correction and Retraction

Correction

JCOEMPH provides a correcting error that occurred after the proofreading process. This includes writing, typing, editing, or publication (e.g., a misspelling, a dropped word or line, or mislabeling in a figure) of a published article. The corresponding authors need to send a direct email to the editorial office (jcoemph.fk@ugm.ac.id) to ask for an erratum and the correction will be taken based on the last proofread provided without altering the overall basic results or conclusions of a published article. We do not permit the addition of new data. For corrections of a scientific nature or issues involving authorship, all disputing parties must agree in the written agreement to the correction of publication. For the omission of an author's name, letters must be signed by the authors of the article and the author whose name was omitted. The editor who handled the article will be consulted if necessary.

Retraction

For the retraction process in this journal is according to the COPE Retraction Guidelines. Please check the guideline here.