Alaztha: Jurnal Kesehatan Nusantara is a peer-reviewed journal published four times a year by CV. Alaztha Media Publikasi. The journal is available online as an open-access journal and also in printed version. This publication ethics statement explains the ethical standards expected from all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and the publisher. This statement is based on the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Journal Publication Ethics Guidelines

The publication of articles in Alaztha: Jurnal Kesehatan Nusantara is an essential part of the development of a high-quality, credible, and reputable scientific network. Peer-reviewed articles reflect the application of proper scientific methods. Therefore, all parties involved in the publication process are required to uphold ethical standards in scientific publishing.

CV. Alaztha Media Publikasi is committed to conducting all publishing processes professionally and responsibly. Any commercial interests, including advertisements or other revenues, will not influence editorial decisions.

Publication Decisions

The editor is responsible for determining which articles are worthy of publication based on scientific quality, originality, contribution to research, and relevance to readers. Editorial decisions are made in accordance with journal policies and applicable legal requirements regarding copyright infringement, defamation, and plagiarism. In making publication decisions, editors may consult with reviewers and editorial board members.

Fair Play

Editors evaluate manuscripts solely based on their intellectual content without discrimination regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, ethnicity, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts. Information regarding manuscripts may only be disclosed to the corresponding author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher when necessary.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s written consent. All parties involved must avoid conflicts of interest that could influence the objectivity of the editorial process.

Reviewer Duties

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and helps authors improve the quality of their manuscripts through constructive feedback.

Promptness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript or know that they cannot complete the review promptly should notify the editor immediately and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document and must not be shown to or discussed with others without the editor’s permission.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and supported by clear arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors and notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published works.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with authors, institutions, or organizations connected to the paper.

Author Duties

Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and provide an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are entirely original and that all sources have been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal or publish redundant manuscripts describing the same research.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have significantly influenced the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the research. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors approve the final version of the manuscript before publication.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

All authors should disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that may influence the interpretation of their research results. Sources of research funding must also be acknowledged.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they must promptly notify the editor and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article.

Research Ethics Misconduct Allegation

Research misconduct includes data fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, and plagiarism in conducting, reporting, or reviewing research. In cases of suspected misconduct, editors and the editorial board will follow COPE guidelines to handle the matter fairly and professionally.

Manuscripts proven to contain unethical conduct will be rejected. If misconduct is identified after publication, the journal will publish corrections or retractions linked to the original article.

Relevant institutions are expected to conduct thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct to maintain the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record.

Further information regarding publication ethics can be accessed through the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Retraction

Published articles may be retracted if:

1. There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable due to misconduct or honest error.
2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper citation, permission, or justification (redundant publication).
3. The article contains plagiarism.
4. The research was conducted unethically.