Policy Statement

Jurnal Kesehatan, published by the Institute for Research and Community Service (LPPM), Universitas Yatsi Madani, Indonesia, recognizes that scholarly evaluation continues after an article has been published. Constructive post-publication discussion provides an opportunity to clarify research findings, examine methodological issues, identify potential errors, and strengthen the accuracy and integrity of the scientific literature.

The journal welcomes relevant, evidence-based, and respectful scholarly comments concerning articles published in Jurnal Kesehatan. All submissions will be assessed fairly and objectively, with due consideration for research integrity, confidentiality, and the rights of authors and research participants.

1. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

Readers, researchers, authors, healthcare professionals, and other interested parties may submit scholarly comments or concerns regarding articles published in Jurnal Kesehatan.

Post-publication discussion may address:

• Research design, methodology, sampling, and data collection.

• Statistical analysis, interpretation of results, and research conclusions.

• Theoretical arguments, scientific evidence, and alternative interpretations.

• Clinical, nursing, midwifery, public health, nutrition, and other health-related findings within the journal's scope.

• Research ethics, informed consent, participant protection, and reporting transparency.

• Significant errors in published data, references, tables, figures, or research reporting.

• Substantiated concerns about the reliability, originality, or integrity of published research.

Comments must focus on the scholarly content of the article, provide clear reasoning, and include supporting evidence or relevant references where appropriate. Personal attacks, discriminatory language, and unsupported accusations are not acceptable.

2. Submission of Scholarly Comments

Scholarly comments, requests for clarification, and evidence-based critiques should be submitted in writing through the official contact channels of Jurnal Kesehatan.

Submissions should include, where applicable:

• The contributor's name, institutional affiliation, and contact information.

• The title of the published article and its DOI or permanent URL, if available.

• A clear and concise explanation of the issue being raised.

• Supporting evidence, relevant data, or scholarly references.

• A declaration of any relevant conflicts of interest.

The editorial team may request additional information when necessary to assess a submission. Submitting a comment does not guarantee publication.

3. Editorial Assessment and Moderation

The editorial team will assess each submission according to its scholarly relevance, clarity, accuracy, supporting evidence, professional language, and compliance with applicable ethical requirements.

Depending on the nature of the submission, the editor may:

• Request clarification or revision from the contributor.

• Seek an independent scholarly assessment when appropriate.

• Forward substantive comments to the original authors for a response.

• Consider the comment for publication in an appropriate format, subject to editorial assessment.

• Decline the submission if it lacks scholarly merit, sufficient evidence, relevance, or compliance with the journal's requirements.

• Refer concerns involving possible research misconduct or significant publication errors for further assessment under the relevant journal policies.

The editorial team retains responsibility for determining whether a comment is suitable for publication and what editorial process is appropriate.

4. Authors' Opportunity to Respond

When a post-publication comment raises substantive questions about a published article, the editorial team may invite the original authors to provide a clarification or evidence-based response.

Authors are expected to respond professionally, address the issues raised, explain relevant methods or findings, and acknowledge identifiable errors where appropriate.

Where justified and supported by the journal's editorial arrangements, a scholarly comment and the corresponding author response may be published together or linked to the original article. Publication of a response is subject to editorial assessment and is not automatic.

Differences in scientific interpretation or theoretical perspective should be addressed through reasoned academic discussion. Such differences do not, by themselves, constitute evidence of research misconduct.

5. Research Ethics and Confidentiality

Post-publication discussion must respect the rights, dignity, privacy, and safety of research participants. This is particularly important for health research involving patients, clinical records, sensitive health information, and potentially vulnerable individuals.

Submissions must not disclose, without appropriate authorization:

• Identifiable patient or participant information.

• Confidential medical records, clinical photographs, or case details.

• Private interview transcripts or other confidential research materials.

• Confidential editorial correspondence or reviewer identities.

• Information that could expose participants to unnecessary harm or compromise their privacy.

Where verification requires access to sensitive data, the editorial team may seek confidential clarification or appropriate supporting documentation rather than unrestricted public disclosure.

6. Corrections and Other Editorial Actions

Post-publication discussion may identify errors or concerns affecting the accuracy, reliability, or integrity of a published article. When such concerns arise, the editorial team will assess the available evidence and determine whether further action is warranted.

Depending on the findings, possible actions include:

• Correction: when a significant error can be corrected without invalidating the main findings or conclusions.

• Expression of Concern: when substantial questions about an article remain unresolved and readers need to be informed while further clarification is sought.

• Retraction: when reliable evidence establishes that the article is seriously compromised by unreliable findings or substantial ethical or publication-integrity violations.

• No further action: when the available evidence does not justify additional editorial action.

Any formal editorial notice will be communicated transparently and linked to the original article where applicable.

Concerns involving suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, research ethics violations, or other forms of research misconduct will be assessed in accordance with the journal's Allegations of Research Misconduct policy.

7. Fairness and Editorial Independence

All post-publication discussions will be considered fairly and without improper influence. Editors and other individuals involved in assessing a submission must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and should not lead an assessment where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned.

The journal seeks to give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive criticism while protecting the confidentiality of relevant parties and maintaining the integrity of the published scholarly record.

The journal's decision to publish or decline a comment will be based on scholarly relevance, supporting evidence, ethical considerations, and editorial judgment.

8. Relationship with Other Journal Policies

This policy complements the existing policies of Jurnal Kesehatan, including the Publication Ethics, Complaint Handling Procedure, and Allegations of Research Misconduct policies.

It specifically addresses scholarly discussion and concerns relating to articles that have already been published. It does not replace procedures for general complaints, appeals against editorial decisions, or formal assessments of suspected research misconduct.

Commitment to Scholarly Dialogue

Jurnal Kesehatan supports constructive, evidence-based academic discussion as part of its commitment to scientific progress, transparency, research integrity, and the continuous improvement of health-related knowledge.