Human subjects and patient consent

Medical research involving human subjects must be conducted according to the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. The research protocol must be approved by the locally appointed ethics committee. The informed consent of patients or volunteers (or their guardian), in particular when there is identifying information, must be obtained. These facts must be indicated in the manuscript.

Animal experimentation

The journal aims for detailed and high-quality reporting of animal experiments and suggests authors follow the ARRIVE guidelines when preparing their manuscript. Authors may be required to provide evidence that they obtained ethical and /or legal approval prior to conducting the research.

Publication decisions

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editors are guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editors and the editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Peer review process

All manuscripts submitted to Paediatrica Indonesiana (PI) will undergo an initial review by the Editor-in-Chief/Vice Editor. Some manuscripts will be returned to authors at this stage if they are deemed more appropriate for another journal, if the paper fails to meet submission requirements, or if they are deemed to have insufficient priority. Submissions that advance in the publication process will undergo appropriate peer review by at least 2 reviewers; written comments, when available, will be returned with all refereed manuscripts. Reports for provisionally accepted papers will include a review by a language editor which authors will be required to follow when revising their manuscript. The final decision on the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript will be made by the Editor-in-Chief.

 For author(s)

  1. There are no author charges (also known as article processing charges/APCs) neither article submission charges.
  2. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are not allowed. Authors should declare that their works are free from any kind of plagiarism (already stated in Author Form). In case plagiarised material is revealed in any of the published papers, the paper will be retracted and Editorial Board will make a public notice to the readers.
  3. Author(s) may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.
  4. 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. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  5. 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.
  6. Authorship should be based on the following criteria: (1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; (2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; (3) Final approval of the version to be published; (4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. For further information please refer to ICMJE recommendation.
  7. A conflict of interest statement must be included in the manuscript before any "Acknowledgements" and "Funding Acknowledgment" sections and should summarize all aspects of any conflicts of interest included on the ICMJE form. If there is no conflict of interest, authors must include 'Conflict of Interest: none declared' in their manuscript.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.

 For editor(s)

  1. Editors and publisher identify and prevent the publication of papers with research misconduct.
  2. Editors and publisher will take appropriate measures to handle any cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct or plagiarism, in form of prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or retraction of the article.

 For reviewer(s)

  1. Reviewer is responsible for providing respectful, constructive, and honest feedback to authors, as well as commenting the ethical questions and possible research and publication misconduct.
  2. Reviewer needs to complete the “Reviewer’s Comments” form by the due date and make a recommendation (reject with explanation in report, accept without revision, revise major/minor). In case can not complete the work, reviewer should notify editor.
  3. Reviewer should keep the manuscripts They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  4. Reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  5. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
  6. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  7. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  8. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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.

 Availability and accessibility of research

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research, and ensures accessibility. The articles published in this journal are archived in the Public Knowledge Project Preservation Network (PKP PN) which is composed of 9 preservation nodes located around the world. For more details see: https://pkp.sfu.ca/pkp-lockss/.