Jurnal Kesehatan is committed to maintaining the quality, integrity, transparency, and scientific rigor of published articles through a systematic and impartial peer-review process. All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening to assess their suitability for the journal's scope, compliance with submission requirements, originality, and basic scientific quality. Manuscripts that pass this stage are evaluated by qualified reviewers through a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.

Reviewers assess the scientific substance and technical quality of manuscripts and provide independent recommendations to the editorial team. The editor makes the final editorial decision based on the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' revisions, the results of the similarity check, and the manuscript's overall scientific merit and compliance with the journal's publication standards. The process may result in rejection, a request for minor or major revisions, or acceptance for publication.

The review and revision process is generally expected to be completed within approximately one month, depending on the complexity of the manuscript, reviewer availability, the number of revision rounds required, and the timeliness of responses from the authors and reviewers. This timeframe represents the expected duration of the review and revision process and does not necessarily include the time required for initial editorial screening, copyediting, proofreading, and publication preparation.

Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system in accordance with the journal's author guidelines. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions are original, accurately reported, ethically conducted, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Initial Editorial Screening

The editorial team conducts an initial assessment of each submitted manuscript to determine its suitability for the journal's scope, compliance with submission requirements, adherence to the author guidelines, originality, ethical considerations, and basic scientific quality.

At this stage, the editorial team also checks whether the manuscript contains the required declarations and supporting documents, where applicable, including ethical approval, informed consent, funding information, and conflict-of-interest disclosures.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements may be returned to the authors for technical correction or rejected without external peer review.

Similarity Check

A similarity check is conducted as part of the initial editorial screening, before a manuscript is sent for external peer review. The check is intended to identify overlapping text, possible plagiarism, redundant publication, and other forms of inappropriate textual reuse.

Similarity reports are interpreted by the editorial team in context. A similarity score alone does not determine whether plagiarism has occurred, as legitimate overlap may arise from references, standard terminology, methodological descriptions, or properly cited material.

If substantial or potentially problematic overlap is identified, the editor may request clarification or correction, return the manuscript for revision, or reject it in accordance with the journal's publication ethics standards. Additional similarity checks may be conducted after revision or before acceptance when considered necessary.

Selection and Assignment of Peer Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers, subject to reviewer availability and the journal's editorial assessment.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, demonstrated expertise, research experience, and subject-matter relevance to the manuscript. Relevant fields include nursing, midwifery, environmental health, nutrition, medical laboratory technology, and other health-related disciplines within the journal's scope.

The editorial team considers the alignment between each reviewer's expertise and the manuscript's research question, methodology, study population, and principal findings. Reviewers should have appropriate scholarly experience and be able to provide an objective, evidence-based assessment.

Reviewers must be independent of the submitted work and must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest. Individuals with conflicts that could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality must not review the manuscript. Relevant conflicts may include personal relationships, institutional or professional affiliations, direct collaboration with the authors, financial interests, academic competition, or other competing interests.

Reviewers are expected to accept assignments only when they have the appropriate expertise, sufficient time to complete the assessment, and no disqualifying conflict of interest.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Jurnal Kesehatan applies a double-blind peer-review process in which authors and reviewers do not know each other's identities during the review process. The editorial team takes reasonable measures to remove identifying information from manuscript files and review documents where applicable.

Reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript's:

• Originality, novelty, and contribution to the relevant field.
• Relevance to the journal's scope and readership.
• Scientific rationale, research design, and methodological rigor.
• Appropriateness of data collection and statistical or qualitative analysis.
• Accuracy of results, interpretation, discussion, and conclusions.
• Ethical considerations and reporting of research involving human participants, where applicable.
• Quality and relevance of references.
• Clarity of presentation, organization, language, and compliance with the journal's author guidelines.

Reviewers provide constructive comments and a recommendation to the editor. Reviewer recommendations are advisory and do not, by themselves, constitute a final editorial decision.

The expected review period is generally up to one month for the review and revision process, although the actual duration may vary according to manuscript complexity, reviewer response times, and the extent of revisions required.

Revision by Authors

Authors are required to address reviewers' comments and editorial recommendations carefully. A revised manuscript should be accompanied by a point-by-point response explaining how each comment has been addressed. Where a recommendation is not adopted, authors should provide a clear scientific justification.

The revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or, when appropriate, assessed by another qualified reviewer. Further revision rounds may be required if substantial issues remain unresolved.

Editorial Decision

The editor responsible for the manuscript evaluates the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' responses, the results of similarity screening, ethical compliance, and the manuscript's overall scientific quality before making the final editorial decision.

The possible decisions are:

• Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scientific, ethical, or editorial requirements.
• Minor Revision: Limited corrections or clarifications are required before the manuscript can be considered for acceptance.
• Major Revision: Substantial revisions are required before the manuscript can be reconsidered.
• Accepted: The manuscript meets the journal's requirements for publication.

Where reviewers provide conflicting recommendations, the editor evaluates the substance of their comments and may seek clarification, request an additional independent review, or consult another qualified editor. The editor retains responsibility for the final decision, which must be based on the manuscript's scientific merit, ethical integrity, relevance, and compliance with the journal's editorial policies.

Confidentiality and Manuscript Protection

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and related materials are treated as confidential documents. They may be accessed only by authorized editorial personnel and reviewers involved in the evaluation process, and by other authorized parties when necessary for legitimate editorial, ethical, or publication-related purposes.

Reviewers must not disclose manuscript contents, discuss unpublished findings with unauthorized individuals, share manuscript files, or use unpublished data, ideas, or information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, or research advantage without the authors' explicit permission.

Editors and reviewers must not reproduce, distribute, or otherwise use submitted manuscripts beyond what is necessary to perform their assigned editorial or review duties. Manuscripts and review materials must be handled securely, and access must be restricted to authorized individuals.

Confidentiality may be limited where disclosure is required to investigate suspected research misconduct, address serious ethical concerns, comply with applicable legal obligations, or follow recognized publication ethics procedures.

Conflicts of Interest and Editorial Independence

All editors and reviewers are expected to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. A person with a relevant conflict must not participate in the assessment or decision-making process for the manuscript concerned.

If a handling editor has a conflict of interest, responsibility for the manuscript must be transferred to an independent editor who has no relevant conflict. The conflicted editor must not influence the reviewer selection, assessment, or final decision.

If a reviewer discloses a conflict of interest or a conflict is identified during the review process, the reviewer will be replaced when necessary, and the editorial team will determine whether an additional independent review is required.

Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly merit, methodological quality, originality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's scope, without inappropriate influence from personal relationships, institutional affiliations, commercial interests, or other competing interests.

Publication

Manuscripts accepted for publication proceed to copyediting, proofreading, layout, and final preparation in accordance with the journal's editorial procedures. Acceptance does not exempt a manuscript from the journal's requirements for publication ethics, accurate reporting, and final production checks.

The journal reserves the right to take appropriate editorial action if concerns about plagiarism, research misconduct, ethical compliance, or the integrity of the published record arise before or after publication, in accordance with its applicable publication ethics policies.