JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Indonesia. JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) accepts articles covering aspects of medicine and health sciences from author who dealing with the fields of medicine and health sciences, including:
The manuscripts submitted online to the JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) will be peer-reviewed. The practice of peer review aims to ensure the quality of articles published in this journal. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. The reviewers in our journal play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the journal.
All manuscripts submitted to JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) are peer reviewed using the procedure outlined below:
Initial manuscript evaluationThe editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least one expert for review.
Type of peer reviewJURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) employs a single-blind review. The manuscript is reviewed by the reviewers that are assigned based on their expertise.
Reviewer reportsReviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results that are clearly presented and support the conclusions. - Correctly references previous relevant work. Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if they so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.
Editor’s decisionThe final decision on the manuscript (accepted, accepted with minor revision, accepted with major revision, rejected, or resubmit) is made by the editor-in-chief (together with the editorial board if required for consideration) based on the reviewers’ critical comments. The editor’s decision is final.
Final reportA final report of the decision whether to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers that may include verbatim comments from the reviewers.
Plagiarisms ReportPlagiarism aspects are screened by the validation team using tools, e.g., Google Scholar findings and Turnitin, and the similarity index should be less than 15%.
This journal publishes 6 issues per annum.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC-SA).
This journal utilizes 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...
JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro Semarang. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the editorial board, the peer reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. 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 the society.
The Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, as the publisher of JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL), takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Medicine Universitas Diponegoro and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
The editor of the JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board 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 making this decision.
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
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.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself 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 editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has 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. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in 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 the papers.
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 detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism aspects are screened by the validation team using tools, e.g., Google Scholar findings and Turnitin, and the similarity index should be less than 15%.
An author 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 is unacceptable.
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 work.
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. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
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.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Publishing an article in this journal is free of Article Processing Charge (APC)
Crossmark
Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by Jurnal Kedokteran Diponegoro to maintain the content published and alert readers to changes if and when they occur.
What is Crossmark?
CrossMark, a multi-publisher initiative from CrossRef, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of a document. Gema Teknologi recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive. Clicking on the CrossMark icon will inform the reader of the current status of a document and may also provide additional publication record information about the document.
Plagiarism aspects are screened by the validation team using tools, e.g., Google Scholar findings and Turnitin, and the similarity index should be less than 15%.
These guidelines are designed to help you use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools responsibly while ensuring that your work meets academic, ethical, and professional standards. As an author, you are always responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of your work. Any use of Generative AI (GenAI) and/or AI-assisted technologies should be acknowledged explicitly and documented. appropriately in a Disclosure section of the manuscript.
Generative AI (GenAI) refers to tools that can create or produce content, such as text, images, or data, based on input you give them. Examples of GenAI include language tools like ChatGPT (which can write or suggest text) or tools that generate images like DALL-E. It's important to be careful with how you use these tools to make sure the work stays original and reflects your own ideas and research.
What You’re Doing
When It’s Okay to Use AI (with Permission and Citation)
When It’s Not Okay to Use AI
Proofreading and Editing
AI can help with checking spelling, grammar, or suggesting improvements in writing style. For example, using tools like Grammarly or Hemingway Editor.
AI cannot be used to rewrite important sections of your manuscript, such as the introduction or argument. The core academic work should be your own.
Organizing References and Citations
You can use AI tools for organizing references, creating citations, or formatting your bibliography (e.g., Zotero, EndNote).
AI should not be used to decide which sources to include or to assess the quality of references. You are responsible for ensuring your references are relevant and accurate.
Generating Ideas and Inspiration
AI can help you brainstorm ideas or give prompts to start a paragraph or section (e.g., ChatGPT, Jasper).
Remember to disclose: If you use AI for ideas or prompts, make sure to explain which tool you used and how you used it.
AI should not be used to create the main ideas, arguments, or analysis in your manuscript. Those should be based on your own research and thinking.
Creating Visuals and Graphics
AI can help you create visuals like charts, diagrams, or illustrations if they are supplementary to your work (e.g., Canva, DALL-E).
Remember to disclose: Clearly state if AI was used to generate visuals, and describe what it contributed.
AI cannot be used to generate or interpret data or research findings. Visuals should not replace the essential work of the research or analysis you have done.
Data Collection and Analysis
AI tools can help you with organizing or automating basic tasks in data collection or sorting through large amounts of data (e.g., AI data mining tools).
Remember to disclose: You must explain how the AI helped you collect or analyze data.
AI cannot interpret your research findings or replace your role in analyzing or making sense of the data. You are responsible for making conclusions from your research.
Writing the Content
Not Allowed: AI cannot be used to write substantial parts of your manuscript, such as the introduction, research argument, or conclusions.
Do not use AI to write or generate important sections of your academic manuscript. You must provide the core content, analysis, and ideas.
You, as the author, are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is original, accurate, and free from ethical issues. This means you must:
For More Information: You may refer to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines for more details on the use of AI tools in research publications.
While Gen AI has potential benefits, our expectation is that reviewers will offer their own (human) feedback on manuscripts and protect the intellectual property of authors by not uploading manuscripts into AI tools. We value the perspectives and experiences our reviewers bring to the peer review process.
JURNAL KEDOKTERAN DIPONEGORO (DIPONEGORO MEDICAL JOURNAL) by http://ejournal3.undip.ac.id/index.php/medico/ is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
