Publication Ethics

Indonesian Journal of Health Administration / Jurnal Administrasi Kesehatan Indonesia (pISSN 2303-3592 & e-ISSN: 2540-9301is a peer-reviewed electronic journal. To that extent, it clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the article publication of IJHA, including the authors, the chief editors, the Editorial Boards, the peer-reviewers­­­­­ and the publishers (Universitas Airlangga). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.



The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Indonesian Journal of Health Administration is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It directly reflects the quality of the authors’ work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody scientific methods. It is, therefore, important to agree with the standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publishing process: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publishers, and the society.  

Universitas Airlangga as the publisher of Indonesian Journal of Health Administration, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously. We recognize our ethical and other responsibilities in ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, thFaculty of Public Health Universitas Airlangga and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers if necessary.


Publication Decisions

The editor of the Indonesian Journal of Health Administration is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive the publishing process. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as it shall then be in force for libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making dis decision.

Process Control

The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality, making use of appropriate software to do so. After passing this test, the manuscript is forwarded to one reviewer or more for double-blind peer review. Each of them will recommend accepting, rejecting, or modifying the manuscript. The review period will be given up to 21 days but can last up to a month and a half.

Fair Play

Editors at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editors and any editorial board members must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

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


Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviewers assist the editors in making editorial decisions, and the editorial communications with the authors may also assist the authors in improving their papers.


Any selected referees who feel unqualified to review the research or that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors and excuse themselves from the review process.


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

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have 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. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlapping manuscript under consideration and any other published papers they have personal knowledge of.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer reviews must be kept confidential and not used for personal interest. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts that have conflicts of interest resulting from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions corresponding to the papers.


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 details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constituting unethical behavior are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data of the paper for editorial review. They should prepare to provide public access to the data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases). If practicable, they should, in any event, prepare to retain the data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

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

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors 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 behavior, and such behavior is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

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 works.

Authorship of the Paper

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. If there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they shall be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding authors should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the paper, have seen and approved the paper’s final version, and have agreed with its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, humans, animals, microbes, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

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 authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editors or publishers and cooperate with the editors to retract or correct the paper.