|Focus and Scope|
Journal of Medicine and Health (JMH) publishes peer-reviewed articles on biomedical sciences, clinical medicine, public health sciences, nutritional sciences, and medical herbs sciences.
Our journal, JMH, highly respects publication ethics and avoids any form of plagiarism. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles in this journal, including authors, editor-in-chief, editorial board, peer-reviewers, and the publisher (Faculty of Medicine, Maranatha Christian University).
DUTIES OF EDITORS
Decision on the Publication of Articles, the Editor in Chief of JMH is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The Editor in Chief is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and subjected to such legal requirements regarding copyright and plagiarism. The Editor in Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this final decision.
Fair play, Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, or citizenship.
Confidentiality, the Editor in Chief, and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest, unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to Editorial Decision, peer review assists the Editor in Chief and the editorial board in making editorial decisions while editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness, any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality, manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the Editor in Chief. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Standards of Objectivity, reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources, reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor in Chief/Editorial Board member's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest, reviewers should not review 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.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Approval from the Ethics Committee. Research articles involving humans, experimental animals submitted to JMH must comply with the principles laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki (Recommendations guiding physicians in biomedical research involving human/ animal subjects. Adopted by the 18th World Medical Assembly, Helsinki, Finland, June 1964, amended by the 29th World Medical Assembly, Tokyo, Japan, October 1975, the 35th World Medical Assembly, Venice, Italy, October 1983, and the 41st World Medical Assembly, Hong Kong, September 1989). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Authors are also required to attach/write down the decree number of the Ethics Committee approval decision letter related to their research.
Reporting standards, authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Data Access and Retention, authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism, authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple and Concurrent Publications, an author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources, proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper, authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest, all authors should 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.
Fundamental errors in published works, when an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
The papers published in the JMH will be considered to retract in the publication if :
1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
3. it constitutes plagiarism
4. it reports unethical research
The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.
|Meet our Editorial Board|