Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Journal Of Nursing Practice (JNP) is published by Universitas STRADA Indonesia. The journal is committed to responsible research reporting, fair editorial assessment, transparent publishing practices, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

This statement applies to authors, reviewers, editors, production personnel, and the publisher. It is informed by relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and applicable Indonesian journal accreditation requirements.

1. Editorial Independence and Responsibilities

Editors evaluate submissions according to their relevance, originality, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and contribution to nursing.

Publication decisions must not be influenced by nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional prestige, commercial interests, publication charges, or personal relationships.

The Editor-in-Chief oversees editorial decisions. The publisher supports journal operations and research integrity without directing the acceptance or rejection of individual manuscripts for commercial or institutional advantage.

Editors must protect confidentiality, manage competing interests, document important decisions, and address credible concerns about submitted or published work.

Manuscripts authored by editors or editorial board members must be handled by an independent editor. Authors involved in journal management must not participate in decisions concerning their own submissions.

2. Authors’ Responsibilities and Authorship

Authors must report their work accurately, describe methods sufficiently for assessment, acknowledge limitations, and avoid unsupported conclusions.

Every author must meet all four authorship criteria: a substantial research contribution, participation in drafting or substantive revision, final approval, and accountability for the work.

Follow JNP’s Authorship Criteria, including its requirements for contribution statements, author approval, changes to authorship, and disputes.

Gift, honorary, purchased, ghost, and unauthorized authorship are unacceptable. Assistance that does not qualify for authorship must be acknowledged appropriately.

3. Reviewers’ Responsibilities and Peer Review

Research articles, systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and case studies proceeding beyond initial editorial screening must undergo double-anonymous review by at least two independent reviewers.

Reviewers must provide objective, constructive, evidence-based assessments and notify the editor when they lack the expertise or time required.

Reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality, disclose competing interests, and report suspected ethical problems privately to the editor. They must not use unpublished information for personal advantage or request unnecessary citations.

Reviewer identities and reports must remain confidential unless disclosure is authorized under an explicitly stated journal procedure.

Reviewers must comply with JNP’s AI Policy, including the prohibition on AI-assisted manuscript assessment and preparation of review comments.

See the Peer Review Policy.

4. Research Ethics, Consent, and Participant Protection

Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable ethical standards and institutional requirements.

Authors must report the ethics committee name, approval number, and year of issuance, or accurately explain a documented exemption or justified alternative where applicable. Editorial assessment does not replace ethical approval required by an institution or competent authority.

Report informed consent, confidentiality protections, and relevant safeguards for vulnerable participants. Obtain consent for publication when identifiable personal information, clinical details, or images are included.

Do not publish identifiable consent forms or confidential participant records. Provide appropriately redacted supporting documentation when requested.

Report study registration and relevant reporting guidance where applicable.

5. Originality, Plagiarism, and Citation Integrity

Submissions must be original and must not be under simultaneous consideration elsewhere. Disclose relevant previous dissemination, related manuscripts, and overlapping publications.

Plagiarism, unattributed text recycling, redundant publication, fabricated references, citation manipulation, and deceptive image manipulation are unacceptable.

Similarity reports are screening tools. Editors must examine matched material in context; a percentage alone neither proves plagiarism nor establishes that a manuscript is free from plagiarism.

Authors must verify references, cite original sources accurately, and obtain necessary permissions for protected material.

See the Plagiarism and Retraction Policy.

6. Data Integrity, Availability, and Reproducibility

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, selectively conceal, or misleadingly manipulate data or research outputs.

Retain relevant data, analytical records, and supporting documentation in accordance with applicable institutional, ethical, and funder requirements. Provide sufficient methodological information for evaluation and, where appropriate, reproducibility.

Editors may request supporting data or explanations. Data sharing must respect consent, confidentiality, intellectual property, and legal restrictions. Restricted access must be explained rather than replaced with an unsupported claim of public availability.

7. Conflicts of Interest

All parties must disclose interests that could influence, or reasonably appear to influence, research reporting or editorial assessment.

Authors

Disclose relevant financial, employment, consultancy, personal, academic, institutional, and other competing interests. Report funding and the funder’s involvement separately. If none exist, state:

“The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

Reviewers

Notify the editor of relevant relationships or competing interests before accepting an invitation. Decline or withdraw when the conflict could compromise impartial assessment. If uncertain, seek editorial guidance.

Editors

Declare relevant interests and withdraw from handling affected manuscripts. An independent editor must manage the assessment and decision.

A disclosed interest does not automatically prevent publication. Editors will assess its relevance and determine appropriate management and disclosure. Undisclosed interests identified later may require clarification, correction, or further investigation.

8. Allegations of Research Misconduct

JNP considers credible concerns about submitted and published work, including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, authorship manipulation, unethical research, undisclosed competing interests, and manipulation of peer review.

Send reports to jnpstrada@gmail.com, identifying the manuscript or article, the concern, and supporting evidence. Anonymous reports will be considered when sufficiently specific and substantiated.

The handling procedure is:

1. Initial assessment: an editor without a relevant conflict evaluates the information and preserves available evidence.

2. Clarification: the parties concerned are invited to respond and provide relevant records. An allegation is not treated as an established finding.

3. Further examination: independent expertise may be sought. Review or publication may be suspended where necessary.

4. Institutional referral: suspected research misconduct requiring formal investigation is referred to the relevant institution, ethics committee, or competent authority.

5. Editorial decision: the journal determines appropriate action based on the evidence, responses, and investigation findings.

6. Record and follow-up: the assessment and reasons are documented, and the published record is corrected where necessary.

Information is shared only as needed for fair assessment and investigation. The journal will protect reporting parties’ identities where reasonably possible without promising absolute confidentiality.

9. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, and readers may raise concerns about editorial conduct, procedures, publication decisions, or journal management through jnpstrada@gmail.com.

Identify the manuscript or article, explain the grounds, and provide relevant evidence. An appeal should address a factual error, procedural problem, or substantive issue affecting the decision.

The Editor-in-Chief reviews complaints not involving their own conduct. Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief must be referred to the publisher for assessment by a person without a relevant conflict. Publisher contact information is available through the journal contact page.

The reviewer of a complaint or appeal may seek independent advice and will communicate the outcome and reasons. An appeal does not guarantee acceptance.

10. Post-Publication Discussion

Readers may submit evidence-based comments, questions, alternative interpretations, or concerns about published articles to jnpstrada@gmail.com.

Include the article title or DOI, the points raised, supporting references or evidence, and any competing interests.

Editors will assess relevance, accuracy, tone, confidentiality, and research-integrity implications. Personal attacks, defamatory statements, promotional content, and unsupported allegations are not suitable for publication.

Authors will normally be invited to respond. Appropriate scholarly correspondence and responses may be published as linked editorial correspondence, with further review where necessary. These items are distinct from the journal’s regular research manuscript types.

Credible integrity concerns will be assessed even if correspondence is not published or authors do not respond. Discussion may lead to clarification, correction, an expression of concern, or retraction.

11. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, Retractions, and Withdrawal

Corrections

Errors affecting the accuracy or understanding of an otherwise reliable article may require a correction. Justified authorship and disclosure changes may also be corrected.

Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when substantial questions remain unresolved, evidence is inconclusive, or an investigation is delayed and readers need to be informed.

Retractions

Retraction may be considered when findings are unreliable or serious ethical problems undermine the publication, including substantial plagiarism, unethical research, redundant publication, or compromised peer review.

Retraction protects the scholarly record and is not determined solely by whether authors agree.

Publication of notices

Notices must identify the affected article, explain the reason and responsible issuing party, remain freely accessible, and be linked to the article. Relevant DOI metadata and article status must be updated.

Retracted articles ordinarily remain accessible and clearly marked. Exceptional removal for legal, privacy, or participant-protection reasons must be documented transparently.

Withdrawal before publication

Authors must submit a reasoned withdrawal request to the editor. Withdrawal does not terminate an ongoing integrity investigation. Published articles are addressed through appropriate post-publication procedures rather than silent deletion.

12. Artificial Intelligence

Authors and editors must disclose AI use according to their roles and comply with JNP’s AI Policy.

AI cannot qualify as an author, replace scientific judgment, or determine editorial decisions. Reviewers must not use AI to assess manuscripts, prepare review comments, or upload manuscript or review material to AI services.

AI-detection results alone do not establish misconduct.

13. Copyright, Access, and Preservation

Authors retain copyright according to the Copyright Notice. Published articles are openly accessible under the license stated on the article and its webpage.

The publisher is responsible for supporting electronic backup, preservation, and continuity arrangements. Claims of external preservation coverage must reflect verified service participation and deposits.

Publication charges and waiver arrangements must be disclosed on the Author Fees page and must not determine editorial decisions.

14. Implementation and Review

The editorial office maintains appropriate records of declarations, assessments, complaints, and corrective actions, with access restricted according to their sensitivity.

JNP will review this statement when its procedures or relevant publication ethics requirements change. Journal policies, submission instructions, reviewer guidance, and published article information must remain consistent.