Peer Review Process
Rigorous scientific evaluation, clinical safety, and research integrity at every stage of publication.
Scientific rigor and patient safety in every submission
Jurnal Kesehatan & Kedokteran is committed to upholding the highest standards of scientific rigor, clinical safety, epidemiological validity, and research integrity. Given the direct implications for human health and clinical practice, all manuscripts undergo comprehensive editorial assessment and stringent peer review.
Double-Blind Peer Review
Jurnal Kesehatan & Kedokteran adopts a double-blind peer-review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential to one another throughout the evaluation process. This ensures decisions are grounded strictly on methodological rigor, statistical integrity, and clinical relevance.
Initial Editorial Screening
Every submission is evaluated by a Medical Editor for:
- scope match and relevance to clinical medicine or public health;
- clarity of hypotheses and clinical or epidemiological objectives;
- research design appropriateness and validity of statistical analysis;
- formal ethical clearance from an accredited institutional review board;
- compliance with reporting standards (e.g., CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA);
- completeness of references and adherence to ICMJE guidelines; and
- similarity screening for textual duplication.
Submissions lacking valid ethical approval, displaying fatal methodological errors, or lacking clinical relevance are rejected at this stage (immediate desk rejection).
External Peer Review
Manuscripts meeting initial benchmarks are assigned to at least two independent peer reviewers with expertise in the clinical specialty, biomedical domain, or biostatistics.
In instances of split recommendations, a third expert opinion or specialized statistical review is commissioned.
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to the following criteria:
Scientific and Clinical Significance
Contributes meaningfully to clinical management, disease prevention, pathology, or healthcare delivery.
Methodological Validity
Rigorous detailing of sample calculation, inclusion/exclusion criteria, experimental procedures, analytical protocols, and minimization of bias.
Statistical Rigor
Proper presentation of statistical power, effect sizes, confidence intervals, and exact p-values.
Ethical Compliance
Transparent documentation of institutional ethics committee approval and patient informed consent.
Evidence-Based Interpretation
Balanced discussion of results grounded in international clinical literature, clearly articulating clinical limitations.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers must provide objective, evidence-based assessments; maintain strict confidentiality over patient and experimental data; alert editors to any signs of data manipulation or figure alteration; declare all competing interests (especially pharmaceutical or medical device ties); and adhere to review timelines.
Editorial Decision
The Editor-in-Chief determines the final outcome based on peer feedback.
Accept
Accept with Minor Revisions
Major Revisions / Re-review
Reject
Revision Process
Authors must supply a revised manuscript alongside an itemized response detailing each modification, providing point-by-point clinical counterarguments where appropriate.
Review Timeline
Standard peer review operates under structured timelines.
An expedited Fast-Track Review workflow is reserved for public health emergencies or major health crises.
Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest
Patient records and pre-publication research data are treated as strictly confidential medical material.
Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are completely independent of commercial pharmaceutical interests, device manufacturers, or institutional funders.
Editorial Commitment
Jurnal Kesehatan & Kedokteran safeguards the integrity of biomedical literature to protect patient outcomes and health policies.