Editorial Policies

 

Focus and Scope

The Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) accepts original manuscripts relating to the field of dentistry, including: original research articles, case reports and literature review articles. The spread of dental fields comprise:

  • Dental Material
  • Dental-related Public Health
  • Endodontics and Conservative Dentistry
  • Forensic Odontology
  • General Dentistry
  • Oral and maxillofacial surgery
  • Oral Biology
  • Oral Medicine
  • Oral Pathology
  • Orthodontics
  • Pediatric Dentistry
  • Periodontics
  • Prosthodontics
  • Radiographic Dentistry
 

Section Policies

Original articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case reports

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Articles [≤ 2020]

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Editorial

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts received by the Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) will be a selection and assessment process (initial review) by the Managing Editors to ensure their accordance with the writing guideline, focus and scope with excellent academic quality. The manuscripts will be peer reviewed by at least two reviewers within the framework of a double-blind policy. If they do not meet the conditions, the author will be given the opportunity to revise their manuscript according to the given criteria. However, there is also the possibility that the manuscript will be directly rejected.

Peer review process: The manuscript has passed the initial review stage will be sent to at least two reviewers who are experts in the field of the submitted manuscript. The reviewers will be provided with an assessment form and are encouraged to provide comments directly on the text of the manuscript. Two weeks is the maximum time for the review process. This process can be done in one or more rounds.

Review decision: The reviewer’s decision will be considered by the Editors to determine the subsequent process of the manuscript. The following recommendations will be provided by the reviewers:

  • Accept submission; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication without any revisions or changes
  • Revision required; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication after being revised in response to the reviewers’ comments
  • Resubmit for review; means that substantive inadequacies in the manuscript, such as data analysis or research variable, type of research, the main theory used and rewriting of paragraphs so need to be revised and resubmit
  • Decline submission; means that the manuscript cannot be accepted for publication because it is not within the scope of the required research or the review provided is related to a very basic problem

Revision stage: After the manuscript is received with a revision note or re-submission, the manuscript will be sent back to the author with the review form from the reviewers and the revision form. The time given to revise the manuscript is two weeks. When returning the revised manuscript, the author is required to fill in and attach the manuscript revision form provided. If the revised manuscript does not match the comments given by the reviewer, the manuscript will be returned to the author for revision.

Final decision: The final decision on the acceptability, or otherwise, of manuscripts will be taken by the editor-in-chief based on reviewers' comments presented during an editorial board meeting. Scanning for instances of plagiarism present in manuscripts will be conducted by means of Turnitin software. The manuscript can still be rejected if the author is not serious about making the necessary revisions.

Proofreading process: After the manuscript is approved and accepted by the editor-in-chief based on reviewers' comments presented during an editorial board meeting, the manuscript will undergo a proofreading process using native speaker services to maintain the quality of the language.

Final stage: The final layout of the manuscript will be sent back to the author to ensure that the content matches the author's writing. The author can revise any typos found in the final manuscript. After confirmation from the author is given, the Editor will process the manuscript for online publication on the website as well as print publication.

 

Publication Frequency

The Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) is published by the Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga. Its areas of investigation cover dental science and dental hygiene. The Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) is published annually on a quarterly basis.

 

Open Access Policy

The Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) provides immediate, free-of-charge access to its content on the principle that rendering research available to the public promotes greater global knowledge exchange.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) (E-ISSN: 2442-9740; P-ISSN: 1978-3728) is an electronic, peer-reviewed journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in publishing an article in this journal, including the author, editor-in-chief, Editorial Board, peer reviewer and publisher (Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga). 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 edition of the Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It is a direct reflection on the quality of the author(s)’ work and that of their supporting institutions. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method applied. It is, therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and society.  

Universitas Airlangga, as publisher of the Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi), takes its duties of guardianship of all stages of the publishing process extremely seriously and recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. The university is, therefore, committed to ensuring that advertising, re-printing or other forms of commercial revenue exert no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this proves useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted for consideration should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers will, invariably, drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the journal's editorial board policies 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 arriving at such decisions.

Fair play

The editor of the Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) evaluates manuscripts consistently for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and editorial staff must not disclose information relating to a submitted manuscript to any individuals other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers or 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, while editorial communications with the author may also assist him/her in improving the paper.

Lead-in times

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported on in a manuscript, or is aware that its prompt review is not possible, should notify the editor and excuse him/herself 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 authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

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

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. Any assertion that an observation, derivation or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should also draw to the editor's attention any substantial similarity between or overlap with the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they have first-hand knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

The confidentiality of privileged information or concepts encountered as a result of a peer review must be respected and not exploited for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with 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 said documents.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports on original research should present an accurate account of the investigative work undertaken and an objective discussion of its significance. Supporting data is to be presented accurately within the paper which should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the research. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and, as such, are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are requested to submit raw data relating to a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared, if practicable, to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) and to retain such data for a reasonable period following publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors should ensure that the work produced is entirely original, with any references and/or quotations being appropriately cited or re-produced.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research contained in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is considered unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Full and appropriate acknowledgment of others’ work must be provided in all cases. Authors should cite publications influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those individuals making a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. All such collaborators should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated to certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all relevant (and only relevant) co-authors are acknowledged within the paper, their having seen and approved the final version and having agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves the use of chemicals, human beings, animals, microbes, procedures or equipment with any unusual inherent hazards, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose within their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of their reported research. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published work

In cases of an author discovering significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, it is his/her obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate in the correction or retraction of the paper.
 

Article processing charge

Articles submitted to the Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) will incur a fee of IDR 500,000 per article for Indonesian authors and USD 100 per article for foreign authors in respect of 'Article Processing Charges' if the article accepted for publication. And also will incur a fee of USD 30 per 1000 words (not including transfer fees) for ‘English Proofreading’ if the article accepted for publication. However, no charge for manuscript submission, including: peer-reviewing, editing, publishing, maintaining and archiving, and the provision of immediate access to full-text versions of the articles will be levied.

 

Accreditation Certificate

The Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) has been certificated as a Scientific Journal by The Indonesian Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology, effective from 2021. Update Accreditation Number: 158/E/KPT/2021

 

Plagiarism Screening

Scanning for similarity within manuscripts will be conducted by means of Turnitin software with a maximum value of 20%.

 

Archiving

This journal utilises 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...