Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The Indonesian Journal of Kidney and Hypertension adheres to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for addressing all facets of publication ethics, particularly regarding the management of instances of research and publication misconduct. COPE principles are adapted by the Indonesian Journal of Kidney and Hypertension to uphold a high standard of ethical conduct for publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers. Clear elucidation of publication ethics is imperative to enhance global research quality. Herein, we delineate the standards expected of editors, authors, and reviewers. Publishers are obliged to refrain from compromising content integrity and are solely responsible for facilitating timely publication.


Upon completion of perusing this Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement, kindly proceed to download the Cover Letter and the Copyright Transfer. It is imperative to sign and submit the Ethical Statement as an integral component of your initial article submission. Furthermore, submission of the Copyright Agreement is prerequisite for publication of the article.

1. Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The dissemination of a manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal constitutes a fundamental element in fostering a cohesive and esteemed knowledge network. It serves as a tangible manifestation of the caliber of the authors' efforts and the institutions backing them. Peer-reviewed articles serve as pillars for, and manifestations of, the scientific methodology. Hence, it is imperative to establish consensus on anticipated ethical conduct standards for all stakeholders engaged in the publication process, including the author, journal editor, peer reviewer, publisher, and society.

2. Publication decisions

The editor of the Indonesian Journal of Kidney and Hypertension holds the authority to determine the suitability of submitted articles for publication in the journal. Such decisions are rooted in the validation and significance of the research to the scholarly community and readership. Editorial policies established by the journal's editorial board, as well as legal obligations concerning issues like libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism, may influence these decisions. Collaboration with other editors or reviewers is permissible for deliberating on publication decisions.

3. Fair play

Editors assess manuscripts based solely on their intellectual merit, irrespective of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, citizenship, or political ideology.

4. Confidentiality

The editor and all editorial personnel are obligated to maintain confidentiality regarding any information pertaining to a submitted manuscript, sharing it solely with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher as deemed necessary.

5. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished data or materials revealed within a submitted manuscript should not be utilized in an editor's personal research endeavors without explicit written permission from the manuscript's author.

6. Duties of Reviewers

6.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review aids the editor in formulating editorial determinations, and the ensuing editorial correspondence with the author can further aid the author in enhancing the manuscript.

6.2. Promptness

If a chosen reviewer feels inadequately qualified to evaluate the research presented in a manuscript or anticipates an inability to conduct a timely review, it is incumbent upon them to inform the editor and abstain from participating in the review process.

6.3. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted for review must be regarded as confidential documents. They should not be shared with or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

6.4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be performed in an objective manner, refraining from personal criticism of the author. Referees should clearly express their opinions with well-supported arguments.

6.5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers are expected to identify pertinent published works not cited by the authors. Any assertion regarding a previously reported observation, derivation, or argument must be supported by the appropriate citation. Additionally, reviewers should notify the editor of any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper within their personal knowledge.

6.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Confidential information or insights acquired during peer review should be treated with confidentiality and not exploited for personal gain. Reviewers should abstain from assessing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest stemming from competitive, collaborative, or other affiliations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

7. Duties of Authors

7.1. Reporting standards

Authors of original research reports are expected to provide a precise depiction of the conducted work and an impartial discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be accurately presented in the manuscript. Sufficient detail and references must be included to enable replication of the study by others. Engaging in fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate assertions constitutes unethical conduct and is deemed unacceptable.

7.2. Data Access and Retention

Authors are requested to furnish the raw data pertaining to a manuscript for editorial evaluation and should be ready to grant public access to this data, if feasible. Additionally, authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable duration following publication.

7.3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their works are entirely original. If authors have incorporated the work and/or words of others, proper citation or quotation must be employed.

7.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors should refrain from publishing manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Simultaneously submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is considered unethical publishing behavior and is deemed unacceptable.

7.5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must consistently acknowledge the work of others. They should cite publications that have significantly influenced the nature of the reported work.

7.6. Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be restricted to individuals who have made notable contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All contributors who have made significant contributions should be credited as co-authors. Individuals who have participated in specific substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author bears the responsibility of ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that no inappropriate co-authors are included. Furthermore, the corresponding author must confirm that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper and have consented to its submission for publication.

7.7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with any uncommon hazards inherent in their usage, the author must explicitly identify these within the manuscript.

7.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors are required to disclose any financial or other significant conflicts of interest in their manuscript that could potentially affect the results or interpretation of their work. Additionally, all sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

7.9. Fundamental errors in published works

If an author identifies a substantial error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author's responsibility to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and collaborate with them to retract or rectify the paper.