Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Media Keperawatan Indonesia is intended to be the university journal for publishing articles reporting the results of research in nursing. Media Keperawatan Indonesia invites manuscripts in the areas of medical-surgical nursing, emergency and disaster nursing, critical nursing, pediatric nursing, maternity nursing, mental health nursing, gerontological nursing, community health nursing, management and leadership nursing.

 

Section Policies

Research Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Systematic Review

Section ini digunakan untuk menampung artikel yang merupakan kategori review artikel penelitian

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Literature Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case Study

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The manuscripts submitted online to the Media Keperawatan Indonesia (MKI) will be peer-reviewed. The practice of peer review aims to ensure the quality of articles published in this journal. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. The reviewers in our journal play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the journal.

All manuscripts submitted to MKI are peer-reviewed using the procedure outlined below. 

Initial manuscript evaluation (Pre-Review)

The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language (abstract), or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least two experts for review.

Type of peer review

MKI employs a single-blind review where the reviewers will remain anonymous throughout the process. The manuscript is reviewed by the reviewers that are assigned based on their expertise.

Reviewer reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results that are clearly presented and support the conclusions - Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer-review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.

Editor’s decision

The final decision of the manuscript (accepted, accepted with minor revision, accepted with major revision, rejected or re-submit) is made by Editor in Chief (together with Editorial Board is required for consideration) based on the reviewers’ critical comments. The editor’s decision is final. 

Final report

A final report of the decision whether to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers that may include verbatim comments from the reviewers.  

 

Publication Frequency

Media Keperawatan Indonesia publishes ten articles in each issue and four issues in a year (February, May, August, and November) since volume 4 No 1, 2021.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full-text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics and Allegations of Research Misconduct

Media Keperawatan Indonesia is a peer-reviewed national journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal as well as allegations of research misconduct, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher (University of Muhammadiyah Semarang). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Media Keperawatan Indonesia is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is, therefore, important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society. 

University of Muhammadiyah as publisher of Media Keperawatan Indonesia takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Also, the Department of Nursing of University of Muhammadiyah Semarang and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

 

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Media Keperawatan Indonesia will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

 

Publication decisions

The editor of the Media Keperawatan Indonesia is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be 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.

 

Complaints and Appeals

Media Keperawatan Indonesia will have a clearly procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to respected personal with respect to case of complaint. The scope of complaints include anything related to journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline. The complaint cases should be sent by email to: mki@unimus.ac.id

 

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

 

Confidentiality

The editor 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, as appropriate.

 

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

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

 

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

 

Promptness

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.

 

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

 

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees 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 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.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

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.

 

Duties of Authors

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. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

 

Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

 

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

 

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgement 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 and Contributorship of the Article

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.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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 work

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.

 

Ethical Oversight

If the research work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

 

Intelectual Property (Copyright Policy)

Journal policy about intelectual property or copyright is declared here: https://jurnal.unimus.ac.id/index.php/MKI/about/submissions#copyrightNotice

 

Peer-Review Process Policy

Peer-Review process/policy is declared here: https://jurnal.unimus.ac.id/index.php/MKI/about/editorialPolicies#peerReviewProcess

 

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Media Keperawatan Indonesia accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by reader. In case the reader giving discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by Editor in Chief), the discussions and correction will be published in next issue as Letter to Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as Reply to Letter to Editor.

 

 ------------------------------

Editor-in-Chief of Media Keperawatan Indonesia

 

Abstracting & Indexing

  1. Google Scholar
  2. Science and Technology Index (SINTA)
  3. Garba Rujukan Digital (GARUDA)
  4. Directory of Open Access Journals
  5. Index Copernicus International
  6. Dimensions
  7. Crossref
  8. Worldcat
  9. ROAD
  10. Bielefeld University Library
  11. PKP Index
  12. ResearchBib

 

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

All manuscripts must be free from plagiarism contents. All authors are suggested to use plagiarism detection software to do the similarity checking. Editors check the plagiarism detection of articles in this journal by using a Plagiarism Turnitin software.

 

Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)

Article Publication: 400.000 (IDR)

Article Publication (fast-track): 500.000 (IDR) 

Click to Payment confirmation

 

Flow of Publications

 

Review Guidelines

Guidelines for Reviewers

Responsibility of Peer Reviewer

The peer reviewer is responsible for critiquing by reading and evaluating manuscripts in the field of expertise, then giving constructive advice and honest feedback to the author of the article submitted. Peer reviewers, discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, how to increase the strength and quality of the paper, and evaluate the relevance and authenticity of the manuscript.

Before reviewing, please note the following:

  1. Is the article requested to be reviewed following your expertise? If you receive a script that covers the topics that are not appropriate areas of your expertise, please notify the editor as soon as possible or you can click the "unable to do the review" statement. Please recommend an alternative reviewer.
  2. Do you have the time to review this paper? The review process must be completed within four weeks. If you agree and require a longer period, notify the editor as soon as possible, or suggest an alternative reviewer.
  3. Is there any potential conflict of interest? Meanwhile, conflicts of interest will not disqualify you as a reviewer, disclose all conflicts of interest to the editor before reviewing. If you have any questions about potential conflicts of interest, do not hesitate to contact the editorial office.

 

Review Process

When reviewing the manuscript, please consider the following:

  1. Title:
    1. Is it illustrating the article?
    2. Is it interesting?
    3. Is the title specific?
  2. Abstract: does it reflect the contents of the article (background, objectives, methods and results)?
  3. Keywords:
    1. The suitability of keywords with study findings
    2. The maximum number of keywords is 4 words

 

Content of the Article

To determine the originality and suitability for the journal, are there any elements of plagiarism over 25% of this paper field? Quick literature search can use certain tools such as Turnitin to see if there are similarities from other parts.

  1. If the study had been previously done by other authors, it is still eligible for publication?
  2. Is the article is fairly new, fairly deep, and interesting to be published?
  3. Does it contribute to knowledge?
  4. Does the article adhere to the standards of the journal?
  5. Scope - Is the article in line with the objectives and scope of the journal?

 

Introduction

Does the introduction describe the accuracy of matters submitted by the author and clearly state the problem being considered? Typically, the introduction should summarize the overview of the topic, the context of the relevant research, and explain the findings of the research or other findings, if any, offered for discussion or gap analysis, and the objective of the study.

 

Method

Comprehensive and perfect:

  1. Does the author accurately describe the design of the study? Typically, this step includes the designs and approaches that have been used in the study.
  2. Does the author explain the variables that have been researched in his study?
  3. Is the exposure design suitable for the answer to the question?
  4. Is there decent enough information for you to imitate the research?
  5. Does the author accurately describe how the data is collected?
  6. Does the article identify the following procedures?
  7. Are there any new methods? If there is a new method, does the author explain it in details?
  8. Is there any appropriate sampling?
  9. Have the tools and materials used been adequately explained?
  10. Does the article exposure describe what type of data is recorded; right in describing the measurement?
  11. Do the authors explain the implementation of research ethics?

 

Results:

This is where the author must explain the findings in his/her research. It should be laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider whether the appropriate analysis has been carried out; the use of statistical tools? If you have better statistical tools to be used in this study, notify it, and the interpretation need not be included in this section.

 

Discussion and Conclusion:

  1. Are the claims in this section is supported by fair results and quite reasonable?
  2. Does the author compare the research results with other previous ones?
  3. Does the conclusion explain how better scientific research to be followed up?
  4. Do the authors explain the findings of the study completely?

 

Conclusion

This is where the author must answer the objectives of the study based on the results that have been obtained.

 

Tables and Pictures:

Is it suitable for the referred explanation by showing data that is easy to interpret and understandable for the readers?

 

Writing Styles

  1. Authors must be critical mostly to the literature systematic review of the issues, which is relevant to the field of study.
  2. Reviews should be focused on a single topic.
  3. The title and abstract should be in English and written in good and coherent grammar.
  4. Easy to understand
  5. Interesting to read

 

Originality Research

  1. The original data and testing must present data that offers a new approach to improve systems, processes, and precision of the tools which are used.
  2. Research policy and observational analysis should clarify the feasibility, effectiveness, and implementation of the research results.
  3. Review, The paper should describe the process and analyze the review of the latest topics in nursing science.

 

Reference

  1. Authors must write down all references used in the manuscript
  2. At least 15 references (minimum 80% primary reference)
  3. The maximum reference is the last 5 years
  4. Citations and bibliographies should be written using a reference manager

 

Final Review

  1. All results of the review submitted by reviewers are confidential
  2. If you want to discuss the article with a colleague, kindly inform the editor
  3. Do not contact the author directly.
  4. Ethical issues:
  5. Plagiarism: if you suspect the article is mostly plagiarism from other authors, please let the editor knows the details
  6. Fraud: It is very difficult to detect a fraud category, but if you suspect the results in the article is not true, please inform the editor

 

Complete "The Review" by the due date to the editorial office. Your recommendation for the article will be considered when the editor makes a final decision and your honest feedback is highly appreciated.

When you write a comment, please show the part of the comment that is only intended for the editor and parts that can be returned to the author.

Please do not hesitate to contact the editorial office with any questions or problems that you may encounter