Peer Review Process

Jurnal Kebidanan Harapan Ibu Pekalongan menggunakan proses Double-blind Peer Review. Prosedur ini memastikan bahwa baik penulis maupun reviewer tidak mengetahui identitas satu sama lain, sehingga proses evaluasi dapat berlangsung secara objektif, independen, dan tanpa bias.

Berikut adalah alur dan tahapan proses peer review di jurnal kami:

  1. Pengajuan Naskah (Manuscript Submission)

    • Penulis mengajukan naskah melalui sistem OJS.

    • Tim editor melakukan pemeriksaan awal (initial check) untuk memastikan naskah sesuai dengan Focus and Scope jurnal, memenuhi panduan penulis, dan memiliki tingkat kesamaan (similarity) di bawah 20% melalui alat deteksi plagiarisme.

    • Naskah yang tidak memenuhi kriteria awal akan dikembalikan kepada penulis.

  2. Penilaian oleh Editor (Editor Assessment)

    • Naskah yang lolos pemeriksaan awal akan dinilai oleh Editor in Chief untuk relevansi, orisinalitas, dan signifikansi penelitian.

    • Naskah yang dianggap tidak sesuai dapat ditolak langsung oleh editor tanpa melalui proses review lebih lanjut.

  3. Pengiriman ke Reviewer (Reviewer Assignment)

    • Naskah yang lolos penilaian editor akan dikirimkan kepada minimal dua reviewer yang ahli di bidang yang relevan dengan topik naskah.

    • Reviewer diberikan waktu 2-4 minggu untuk mengevaluasi naskah.

  4. Evaluasi oleh Reviewer (Reviewer Evaluation)

    • Reviewer akan memberikan masukan dan rekomendasi berdasarkan kriteria berikut:

      • Orisinalitas dan kontribusi naskah.

      • Relevansi dengan Focus and Scope jurnal.

      • Metodologi penelitian yang digunakan.

      • Analisis data dan hasil penelitian.

      • Bahasa dan struktur penulisan.

    • Masukan reviewer disampaikan kepada editor.

  5. Keputusan Akhir (Final Decision)

    • Editor in Chief membuat keputusan akhir berdasarkan masukan dari para reviewer. Keputusan yang mungkin diambil adalah:

      • Accept (Diterima): Naskah diterima untuk publikasi tanpa revisi.

      • Minor Revision (Revisi Minor): Naskah diterima dengan revisi kecil yang tidak memerlukan review ulang.

      • Major Revision (Revisi Mayor): Naskah diterima dengan revisi besar dan harus melalui proses review ulang.

      • Reject (Ditolak): Naskah ditolak karena tidak memenuhi standar ilmiah jurnal.

  6. Pemberitahuan kepada Penulis (Notification to Author)

    • Editor menginformasikan keputusan akhir kepada penulis, beserta masukan dan saran dari reviewer. Identitas reviewer akan tetap dirahasiakan.

 

Jurnal Kebidanan Harapan Ibu Pekalongan employs a Double-blind Peer Review process. This procedure ensures that both the author and the reviewer remain anonymous to each other, allowing for an objective, independent, and unbiased evaluation of the manuscript.

The following outlines the workflow and stages of our peer review process:

  1. Manuscript Submission

    • Authors submit their manuscripts via the OJS system.

    • The editorial team conducts an initial check to ensure the manuscript adheres to the journal's Focus and Scope, follows the Author Guidelines, and has a similarity index below 20% using plagiarism detection software.

    • Manuscripts that do not meet these initial criteria will be returned to the author.

  2. Editorial Assessment

    • Manuscripts that pass the initial check are assessed by the Editor in Chief for relevance, originality, and research significance.

    • Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be rejected outright by the editor without further peer review.

  3. Reviewer Assignment

    • Manuscripts that pass the editorial assessment are sent to a minimum of 2 (two) expert reviewers in the relevant field.

    • Reviewers are given 2-4 weeks to evaluate the manuscript.

  4. Reviewer Evaluation

    • Reviewers provide comments and recommendations based on the following criteria:

      • The manuscript's originality and contribution.

      • Relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.

      • Research methodology.

      • Data analysis and results.

      • Language and writing structure.

    • Reviewer feedback is submitted to the editor.

  5. Final Decision

    • The Editor in Chief makes the final decision based on the reviewers' recommendations. The possible decisions are:

      • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without revisions.

      • Minor Revision: The manuscript is accepted with minor revisions that do not require re-review.

      • Major Revision: The manuscript is accepted with major revisions and must undergo a second round of review.

      • Reject: The manuscript is rejected as it does not meet the journal's scientific standards.

  6. Notification to Author

    • The editor informs the author of the final decision along with the reviewers' comments and suggestions. The identity of the reviewers remains confidential.