Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Berita Kedokteran Masyarakat (BKM Public Health and Community Medicine) is a peer-reviewed and open access journal that deals with the fields of public health and public medicine. The topics of the article will be grouped according to the main message of the author. This focus covers areas and scope related to aspects of:

- Epidemiology 

- Infectious diseases control

- Clinical Epidemiology

- Environmental Health

- Occupational Health

- Healthy City

- Public Health and Primary Health Care 

- School of Health Promotion

- Healthy lifestyles

- Health promotion

- Health and Social Behavior

- Tobacco and smoking 

- Adolescent Health 

- Public Health Nutrition

- Maternal and Child Health

- Reproductive Health

- Population Health

- Health of Vulnerable People 

- Social Determinants of Health

- Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

-  Human Resource Management

 

We prioritize receiving articles originating from experience in activities in the Ministry of Health, the health department, local government, Puskesmas (primary healthcare) and other health service facilities, non-governmental organizations, private institutions, and related village communities that need to be improved in public health and make changes so that the status the health of the population for the better.

BKM will only accept manuscripts which fulfill the following criteria:

  1. The manuscript serves the foundation for future researchers and scientists on their special public health interests.

  2. The manuscript focus on both researchers and public health practitioners and policymakers in any governmental bodies, private sectors, and other social institutions.

  3. The manuscript has an introduction section that reviews 10-20 articles from relevant public health fields national and/or international community medicine and/or public health journals.

  4. The manuscript includes public health subjects (such as epidemiology, environmental health, occupational health, social health, health policy, public health information system, health promotion, public health nutrition, maternal and child health, or other subject areas beneficial for the improvement of public health in the workplace, community, or wider populations).

 

Section Policies

Epidemiology

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Communicable Diseases Control

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Clinical Epidemiology

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Non-communicable disease prevention strategies

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health and Social Behavior

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Community Health Empowerment

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health Promoting School

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health Promoting University

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Environmental Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Reproductive health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Maternal and Child Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Nutrition

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Program Management

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Hospital Management

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Informatics

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Regulation and Policy

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Indigeneous and Remote Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health Financing and Insurance

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Occupational Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Primary Health Care Management

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Global Health Perspective

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Epidemiology of Tropical Diseases

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Editorial

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Healthy Cities

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Healthy Life Styles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Community Health and Primary Health Care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Tobacco and Smoking

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health Promotion Strategies

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Adolescent Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Population Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Perilaku Kesehatan Penduduk Spesifik

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Hygiene and sanitation

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Human Resource Management

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Program Management and Practice

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Nursing

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Primary Health Care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Emergency

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Social Determinants of Health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Food Security and Safety

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Public Health Education

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case report

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review atau tinjauan pustaka

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letter to Editor

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Seminar dan Konferensi

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Field Reports

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Policy Brief

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research Practice

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Open Review Articles

I want to review this article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

PHS3

Sesi untuk abstrak yang dipresentasikan pada 3rd public health symposium

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

PHS1

Memuat abstrak yang dipresentasikan di 1st Public Health Symposium

 

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

PHS2

Memuat abstrak yang dipresentasikan d 2nd public health symposium

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Plenary 1

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Plenary 2

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Plenary 3

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Pre online first

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Program public health di daerah terpencil dan indigenous health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Dokter keluarga dan dokter layanan primer

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Nusantara sehat

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Gerakan masyarakat untuk sehat

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Program Indonesia Sehat Pendekatan Keluarga

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Program desa siaga

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

3. Gerakan masyarakat hidup sehat

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

5. Program gizi masyarakat

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

6. Program pengawasan makanan

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

7. Program kesehatan berbasis teknologi informasi

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

8. Penanggulangan penyakit menular

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

9. Public health regulation and policy

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

12. Manajemen Program Kesehatan

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

14. Program kesehatan lingkungan

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

15. Program asuransi kesehatan

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

16. Program kesehatan spesifik untuk populasi rentan

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Perspective

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Accepted

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

In-Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Research articles in this journal will be reviewed blindly by at least two reviewers. The reviewers then make a decision based on a recommendation with several possibilities: rejected, major revision, minor revision, or accepted.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Publication Ethics

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS


General Guidelines

Research that is reported must be carried out in an ethical and responsible manner, and must comply with all relevant laws.

The author must present the results clearly, honestly, without fabrication, falsification or manipulation of data.

Authors must explain their research method clearly and decisively so that their findings can be confirmed by others.

Authors must comply with publication requirements, i.e. the published work is original, not the result of plagiarism, and has not been published elsewhere.

The author must be collectively responsible for the work sent and published.

Relevant sources of funding and conflicts must be stated

 

Publication of the study who is responsible 

1. Strength and reliability 

Reported research must be carried out in an ethical and responsible manner and follow all relevant laws.

Research that is reported must be carried out properly and carefully.

The researcher must use analytical methods and display appropriate data and displays (and, if necessary, seek and follow expert advice on this matter).

Authors must be collectively responsible for their publications. Researchers must carefully examine their publications at each stage to ensure methods and findings are reported accurately.

2. Honesty 

The researcher must present the data honestly without fabrication, falsification or manipulation of data. Images must not be modified so that they produce misleading results.

Researchers must explain the method they are using and present their findings clearly and unambiguously. Researchers must follow applicable reporting guidelines. The publication must provide sufficient detail that allows the experiment to be repeated by other researchers.

The research report must be complete. The assessment should not eliminate unpleasant, inconsistent or inexplicable findings or results that do not support the hypothesis or interpretation of the author or sponsor.

Funders and research sponsors cannot veto publication of findings that do not support their product or position. Researchers should not enter into agreements that allow research sponsors to veto or control the publication of findings (unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as research that is closed by the government for security reasons). 

Authors must immediately notify editors if they find errors in the work sent, received or published. The author must cooperate with the editor in issuing corrections or revocation of the article, if needed.

Authors must accurately refer to other people's work in quotations.

Authors may not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.

3. Balance 

New findings must be presented in the context of previous research. Other people's work must be displayed fairly and fairly. The scientific review and synthesis of previous studies must be complete, balanced, and must include findings regardless of whether they support the proposed hypothesis or interpretation or not. Editorials or opinions that convey a single point of view or argument that must be clearly distinguishable from scientific reviews .  

Research limitations must be addressed in the publication.

4. Originality 

Authors must comply with the publication requirements that the published work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language. Works may not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal unless the editor has agreed to joint publication. If articles are published together, this should be explained to the reader.

Copyright law and applicable regulations must be followed. Copyright material (for example tables, numbers or quotes) must be reproduced with the appropriate permission and acknowledgment.

Previous works and relevant publications, both by other authors and the authors themselves, must be recognized and referred correctly. Where possible, citations must originate from original references.

Data, text, numbers, or ideas originating from other researchers must be correctly referenced, and may not be presented as if they were the author's own. Original words taken directly from other researchers' publications must appear in quotation marks with correct citations.

The author must provide the editor with information if the findings have been previously published or if several reports or analyzes of one data set are under consideration for publication elsewhere. Authors must provide copies of related publications or works submitted to other journals.

Some publications arising from a research project must be clearly identified and the main publications must be referred. Translations and adaptations for different readers must be clearly identified. Original sources must be mentioned, copyright regulations must be respected. If in doubt, the author must seek permission from the original publisher before republishing the work.

5. Transparency 

All research funding sources, including direct and indirect financial support , procurement of equipment or materials, and other support (such as statisticians or assistant writers) must be mentioned. 

Authors must disclose the role of research funders or sponsors (if any) in the design, implementation, analysis, interpretation and reporting of research.

Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to influence the interpretation of their findings or which editors, reviewers or readers might want to know. This includes relationships with journals, for example if editors publish their own research in their own journals. In addition, the author must follow the journal requirements and institutional requirements to declare a conflict of interest. 

6. Author Contributions 

Authors of research publications must accurately reflect the contribution of each individual to the article.

The main contributors must be listed as writers, while those who make less substantial, or purely technical contributions, either to research or to publications are listed in the awards section ( acknoledgement ). Criteria as writers or awards ( acknoledgement ) must be agreed at the beginning of the project.

The researcher must ensure that only those who meet the authorship criteria (ie have a substantial contribution to the research work) are valued with the ' authorship ' and that the author with a worthy contribution is not eliminated. Journal institutions and editors must prevent guest, gift, and ghost authorship . 

Note:

- guest authorship are those who do not meet the criteria of being a writer but are listed by name because of seniority, reputation or influence 

- gift authorship are those who do not meet the criteria of being a writer but are listed for personal support or in exchange for payment 

- ghost authorship (ghost writers) are those who meet the criteria as an author but his name is not listed 

All authors must agree that their names are included and must approve the versions sent and received for publication. Changes to the list and order of authors must be approved by all authors, including those from authors who have been removed from the list. The author's correspondence must act as a point of contact between the editor and other authors. He must engage with other writers and involve them in major decisions about publication (eg responding to reviewer comments ). 

Authors are not allowed to use acknowledgments / awards ( acknoledgement ) that are misleading to imply contributions or support by certain individuals who, in fact, are not involved with the work.

7. Accountability and responsibility 

All authors must read and understand the article submitted and must ensure that the article. follow the principles set out in this guideline. In most cases, the authors are expected to take joint responsibility for the integrity of research and reporting. However, if certain authors are only responsible for certain aspects of research and articles, this must be stated.

The author works closely with editors and publishers to immediately correct errors or omissions after publication.

Authors must respond appropriately to post-publication comments or published correspondence.

8. Compliance with peer review and publication regulations    

Authors must follow the publisher's requirements that the work not be submitted to more than one publisher at the same time.

Authors must inform editors if they withdraw their articles from a review, or choose not to respond to reviewer comments.

Authors must respond to reviewer comments in a professional and timely manner.

Authors must respect the publisher's request for a press embargo, meaning that they cannot allow their findings to be reported to the press if they have been accepted for publication (but not yet published). The author and the institution must work together to coordinate media activities (eg press releases and press conferences) related to publication. Press releases must accurately refer to the work and must not contain statements outside of the research results.

9. Reporting that is responsible for research involving human subjects or experimental animals 

An ethical approval letter and permit or other registration documents must have been obtained before the study begins. The details of the letter must be submitted in the article, for example the name of the ethics commission and licensing authority.

If requested by the editor, the author must be able to show evidence of these letters, including proof of approval after explanation from the research subjects.

Researchers should not publish identifiable individual data without the specific consent of the individual (or guardian)

Researchers must publish all research results that might contribute to knowledge. In particular, there is an ethical responsibility to publish all clinical trial findings. Publication of clinical trials that fail or obtain results that reject hypotheses can help prevent a repeat of similar research. If the findings from small studies that fail to reach statistical significance are combined, a statistically significant result of meta-analysis might be obtained.

Authors must provide research protocols for journal editors if requested (for example for clinical trials) so reviewers and editors can compare research reports with protocols to check that research has been carried out according to plan and that no relevant details have been ignored. The researcher must follow the relevant clinical trial registration requirements and must include the clinical trial registration number in all publications that arise from the clinical trial.

 

Adapted from:

Wager E & Kleinert S (2011) Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 50 in: Mayer T & Steckeck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp. 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7)  

 

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR JOURNAL EDITORS

 

General tasks and editor responsibilities

The editor is responsible for everything published in the journal.

This means that editors must (1) strive to meet the needs of readers and writers; (2) trying to improve the quality of journals on an ongoing basis; (3) has a process or flow to guarantee the quality of the material published; (4) promoting freedom of expression and opinion; (5) maintaining the integrity of the academic track record; (6) overriding business interests that sacrifice intellectual and ethical standards; (7) is willing to issue corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed

1. Relationship with readers 

The reader must obtain information about who is funding a research or other scientific work and what is the role of the funder in the research and publication

2. Relationship with the author 

The editors' decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication must be based on the importance of the article, its originality and clarity, as well as the validity of the study and the relevance of the manuscript

The editor does not cancel the decision to accept the manuscript unless there are serious problems identified at the time of submission.

The editor may not overturn the decision to publish the manuscript that was made by the previous editor, unless a serious problem is identified.

An explanation of the peer review process must be published, and the editor must be responsible for any deviations from the outlined process.  

The journal manager must have a mechanism that allows the writer to appeal the editorial decision.

The editor must publish the script writing guidelines for the writer. The guidelines must be updated regularly and must refer to this code of conduct.

3. Relationships with bebestari partners ( reviewers ) 

The editor must provide a task guide for the peer reviewer ( peer reviewer ) including a guide for submitting confidential review results.

The editor must ask the peer reviewer to disclose potential conflicts of interest before reviewing the manuscript.

The editor must have a system to ensure that the identity of the peer reviewers is kept confidential. 

4. Relationships with members of the editorial board 

The editor must provide a guideline for the editorial board

5. Relationships with journal owners and publishers 

The editor's relationship with the publisher and / or owner must be based on the principle of editorial independence.

The editor makes decisions regarding the publication of articles based on the quality and suitability of the journal without interference from the journal owner

6. Editorial and peer review process 

The editor ensures that the peer review process is fair, unbiased and timely.  

Editors must have a system to ensure that manuscripts sent to journals remain confidential while in the review process.

The editor must ensure the quality of published material

7. Maintain the confidentiality of individual data 

Editors must comply with the law on confidentiality in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Indonesia. They must always protect the confidentiality of individual information obtained during research or professional interaction.

8. Encouraging compliance with the ethics of medical and health research for research involving humans or experimental animals 

The editor must ensure that the research published complies with internationally recognized medical and health research ethical guidelines.

9. Matters relating to alleged violations 

Editors have an obligation to act if they suspect ethical violations. This assignment applies to published and unpublished articles.

The editor should not only reject articles that are suspected of violations. Ethically, editors are required to investigate further.

10. Maintain the integrity of the academic track record 

False, misleading or inaccurate statements must be corrected immediately with full attention.

The editor must follow the retraction guidelines (retraction) from COPE.

11. Intellectual property rights 

Editors must be aware of intellectual property rights issues.

12. Support the discussion process 

The editor encourages and is willing to consider criticism of a work published in a journal.

The author of the article being criticized must be given the opportunity to respond.

The editor must allow the publication of research with negative results

13. Conflict of interest 

Editors must have a conflict of interest management system for themselves and for staff, authors, peer reviewers and editorial board members.

 

Adapted from:

COPE Code of conduct and best practice guidelines for Journal Editors (www. Publicationethics.org)

 

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR PEER-REVIEWER

 

Reviewers partners must:

Only willing to study the manuscript in accordance with their field of expertise and be able to study the manuscript in accordance with the required deadlines

Maintain confidentiality of peer-review and do not disclose the details of the manuscript or the results of its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those released by the journal  

Not use information obtained during the peer-review process for personal or other people's or organizational interests, or to harm or discredit other parties  

Declare all potential conflicts of interest, seek advice from a journal if you are not sure whether something is a conflict of interest

Not influenced by the origin of the text, nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the author, and may not be influenced by commercial considerations

The resulting reviews are objective and constructive, avoiding comments that attack or make comments that are defamatory and insulting

Provide professional reviews that are accurate and in accordance with the expertise of the reviewer. 

Understanding that pretending to be another party during the review process is a serious offense

 

Adapted from:

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. www. publicationethics.org

 

 

Screening for Plagiarism

Plagiarism screening is done using the help of Turnitin.