About the Journal

FOCUS AND SCOPE

Focus

Sihat: Journal of Health Science is published by Indo Publishing. This journal aims to provide original research articles, review articles, and case study on health field. This journal is issued twice a year and it is a tool for researchers, academics, and practitioners who wished to channel their thoughts and findings in the field of health.

Scope

The scope of articles published by Sihat: Journal of Health Science are nursing, public health, education in health sector, health administration, hospital administration, midwifery, and health promotion.

 

 

AUTHOR GUIDELINES

Types of paper

Sihat: Journal of Health Science receives articles in an original research paper, review paper, and case study.

Original research paper

Original research paper is an article that reports detailed research and classified as primary literature. Its format includes an introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion. This paper is generally long, with word count ranging from 2000 to 6000.

Review paper

A review paper is an article that provides up-to-date report on the current situation regarding certain important topics on health field. It discusses previous development from the topic and gives an overview of the future. In general, a review paper is usually long, ranging from 2000 to 5000 words or even more, depending on the case being reviewed. 

Case study

A case study is an article compiled by health practitioners presenting details of unique cases on the health case being handled. The cases are usually those that contribute significantly to the knowledge in the health field. This article is expected to discuss the assessment, diagnosis, intervention, implementation and evaluation. 

General structure

Paper identity

The title should be short, simple and reflects the contents of the manuscript. After the title of the manuscript, followed by the names of authors and affiliation. Last is the complete contact information for the corresponding author (email address)

Abstract
The abstract section is created in a single paragraph, written in Indonesian and English, maximum 250 words, 1 space with 3-6 strong keywords. Abstract contains the background, objectives, research methods, results and conclusions. Abstract must be able to represent the content of the paper.

Introduction
The introduction of a manuscript includes a brief overview of the literature relating to the research topic. Introduction generally consists of :

  1. Background: contains general topics, issues, or areas of concern to illustrate the context.
  2. Problems studied: contains trends, new perspectives, gaps, or conflicts between findings.
  3. Research questions will be answered by the study and how to do it for original research paper or author's reason for reviewing the literature.

Method
The research method contains a direct description of the methods used in a study. For the original research paper and case study, the method contains the statement of the materials used in the study, the main procedures, the techniques used in the data retrieval, and the analysis techniques. If the research uses a particular experimental design, the method part also includes the design of the research. For literature research, the material and methods sections contain the amount of researches included information on data sources, data search strategies, selection criteria of articles included in the review, the amount of research included, and the methods or statistics for its analysis. The researcher must ensure that the data source is clearly identified and valid.

Result and discussion

The results present resarch findings. The results are presented in tables and figures that are interesting and clear. This section of the discussion contains interpretations of research results to give meaning to the reader or provide guidance for further research. All figures and tables need further explanation to reveal the truth.

Conclusion
The conclusion contains a summary of the research findings. Then, followed by the main points of the discussion. A general conclusion ends with a statement about how the research work contributes to the field of study as a whole.

References
This section lists all the references cited in the text using APA style. References not less than 15. Citation and reference systems must use the Reference Management System such as Mendeley, EndNote, Zotero. 

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS

Our Publication Ethics are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
  5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors 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 editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. 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. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
  4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

 

PEER REVIEW PROSESS

Peer Review Process

Description

Submissions should be prepared in accordance with the Author Guidelines. The manuscript may be returned to authors without a scientific assessment if they do not meet all submission requirements, if they are not in the correct format, or cannot be downloaded reliably.

Submissions must represent the original and independent work of the authors. Each new submission is assessed by Editor Chief and the editor chief will determine whether it falls within the general remit of health field. We will reject a manuscript without review if it contains insufficient content; it exceeds our word limit or is incorrectly formatted; it is poorly presented and unclear. Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment will be handled by editor chief and Editorial Board Member to oversee the review process for contribution, originality, relevance, and presentation.

Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. A single-blind review is applied, where authors' identities are known to reviewers. Peer review comments are confidential and will only be disclosed with the express agreement of the reviewer. All manuscripts are subject to peer review and authors can expect a decision, or an explanation for the delay, within 2 months of receipt. If a revision is invited, the corresponding author should submit the revised manuscript within 2 weeks. The final decision is taken by Chief Editor based on the information gained through the peer-review process.

We ensure that the reviewed manuscript is treated confidentially prior to being published, as explained in publication ethics.

Types of decision

There are four types of editorial decisions during the peer review process, which are:

 

Decline submission

Following peer review, the paper is judged not to be acceptable for publication in Sihat: Journal of Health Science and resubmission is not possible.

 

Resubmit for Review

The submitted version of the paper is not acceptable and requires major revision, but there is clear potential in the work, and Sihat: Journal of Health Science is prepared to consider a new version. Authors are offered the opportunity to resubmit their paper as a new submission. Concerns will remain regarding the suitability of the paper for publication until the editors are convinced by the authors that their paper fits the scope and standards of Jurnal Sihat. The resubmitted manuscript will be returned to the original editor member if at all possible.

 

Revision

The paper requires changes before a final decision can be made. Authors are asked to modify their manuscript in light of comments received from referees and editors and to submit a new version for consideration within 2 weeks of receiving the decision letter. A point-by-point explanation of how comments have been addressed must be supplied with the revised version of the paper. Revisions may undergo further peer review and papers may undergo more than one round of revision. If the authors do not revise their papers to the satisfaction of the editors, the paper can still be declined from publication in Jurnal Sihat.

 

Accept submission

The paper is accepted for publication, subject to conditions that need to be addressed in producing a final version of the manuscript. These may include sub-editing changes and the minor amendment to ensure the paper fully matches our criteria. After final checking in the editorial office, acceptance is confirmed and the paper is forwarded to the publishers for publication.

Galley proof

Page proofs will be sent to the corresponding author for final checking. Corrections to the proofs must be restricted to printer’s errors: any other changes to the text, in equations or grammar, may be charged to the author. Proofs should be returned to the editors within three days of receipt to minimize the risk of the author’s contribution having to be held over to a later issue. The editors do not accept responsibility for the correctness of published content. It is the author’s responsibility to check the content at the proof stage.

 

 

OPEN ACCES POLICY

Sihat: Journal of Health Science is an open-access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the users. All open access papers are licensed and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- Non-Commercial 4.0 International License, which permits authors and readers unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction of the material in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited. This is enabled under the terms of Attribution and Non-Commercial usage of the material.