| Main Menu
| Editorial Team
| Focus and Scope
|Peer Reviewer Process
|Copyright Notice & Licensing
| MENU UTAMA
Peer Review Process
The manuscripts submitted online to the Jurnal Kebidanan (JKeb) will be peer-reviewed. The practice of peer review aims to ensure the quality of articles published in this journal. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. The reviewers in our journal play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the journal.
All manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Kebidanan (JKeb) are peer reviewed using the procedure outlined below.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least two experts for review.
Type of peer review
Jurnal Kebidanan (JKeb) employs a double-blind review where the authors of the manuscript will remain anonymous throughout the process. The manuscript is reviewed by the reviewers that are assigned based on their expertise.
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions - Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.
Final decision of manuscript (accepted, accepted with minor revision, accepted with major revision, rejected or re-submit) is made by Editor in Chief (together with Editorial Board if required for consideration) based on the reviewers’ critical comments. The editor’s decision is final.
A final report of the decision whether to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers that may include verbatim comments from the reviewers.