Publication Ethics

All peer review processes are carried out in a transparent and well-managed manner. IHJ provides training for editors and reviewers and has policies on peer review specifications, applying the right review model (double-blind method review), handling conflicts of interest, appeals, and styles that may arise in peer review (CORE Practice [CCP 9]).

• Selection of Reviewers: Reviewers are invited to submit applications and CVs. Selection is based on expertise and suitability, ensuring high-quality manuscript evaluation.
• Training for Editors and Reviewers: Training sessions cover ethical guidelines, review process management, and providing constructive feedback.
• Ethics of Reviewing: Reviewers must avoid conflicts of interest, maintain confidentiality, and provide objective, unbiased evaluations.
• Performing Reviews and Time Allowed: Manuscripts undergo double-blind review by at least two reviewers. The review period is approximately three weeks; a third reviewer may be consulted if needed.
• Allegations of Research Misconduct: Editors investigate suspected errors, falsification, plagiarism, or citation manipulation following COPE best practices.
• Review Report Ownership and Transferability: Reviewers own their reports. Transfer or sharing of reviews follows journal policy, often anonymized for authors or editors.
• Decisions on Acceptance, Revision, and Rejection: Decisions are based on reviewer recommendations; the Editor-in-Chief and editorial committee make the final call.
• Procedures for Review of Revisions and Handling Appeals: Revised manuscripts are evaluated against feedback. Appeals are handled transparently; complaints can be sent to ideahealthjournal@gmail.com 
• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Reviewers assist editors and help authors improve manuscript quality through constructive feedback.
• Promptness: Reviewers must complete reviews on time or inform the editor if reassignment is needed.
• Confidentiality: Manuscripts are confidential and must not be shared without editor permission.
• Standards of Objectivity: Reviews must be objective, free from personal bias, and supported by scholarly evidence.
• Acknowledgements of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant references and ensure proper citations to avoid plagiarism or overlap.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose conflicts and refrain from reviewing manuscripts with conflicts of interest.

Procedure for Allegations of Research Misconduct

1. Clarification and assessment of the allegation's validity and conflicts of interest.
2. If deviations or errors are found, authors are informed and asked to respond.
3. Further review may involve additional experts. If no misconduct is found, corrections may be issued. Institutions are expected to prevent violations.
4. Editorial actions may include revisions, corrections, retraction with replacement, or full retraction of articles.

IHJ implements building blocks to develop a coherent and respectful knowledge network in publishing articles. This enhances the quality of authors’ work and the institutions supporting them. Peer-reviewed articles support proper scientific methodology (double-blind method). Ethical behaviour standards are expected from all parties involved in publishing: authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and the public.

PT Mantaya Idea Batara, as the publisher, maintains all stages of publishing while adhering to ethical responsibilities. IHJ ensures that advertising, reprinting, or other commercial revenue has no influence on editorial decisions. Editors handle allegations from whistleblowers and can be contacted at ideahealthjournal@gmail.com

Allegations of Misconduct (Core Practice [CCP 1])

IHJ has a clear process for handling allegations pre- and post-publication. Publication misconduct includes plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, duplicate or overlapping submissions, and salami publication. Reports may relate to published articles or manuscripts under review.

Conflicts of Interest (Core Practice [CCP 4])

IHJ defines conflicts of interest for authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers. Policies require mandatory disclosure of funding and potential conflicts. Editors ensure submissions are free of conflicts and unpublished work is not misused without author consent.

Data and Reproducibility (Core Practice [CCP 5])

IHJ has data availability policies and encourages reporting, registration of clinical trials, use of standardized guidelines, and sharing of data, code, and materials. Cooperation between editors and institutions is required for alleged data fabrication or falsification. Guidelines include:

• Data sharing encouraged or mandated, with availability statements when needed.
• Citation of data sources.
• Uploading anonymized data to repositories, handling confidential data, registering trials, and submitting reporting checklists.

Ethical Oversight (Core Practice [CCP 6])

Ethical oversight covers consent to publication, research involving vulnerable populations, animal and human research ethics, confidential data, and ethical business practices. IHJ reviews submitted work to ensure compliance with research ethics guidelines.

Intellectual Property (Core Practice [CCP 7])

Policies on copyright, publishing licenses, and publication fees are clearly described. Authors may retain copyright under open-access or transfer rights to the publisher. IHJ addresses prepublication, plagiarism, and overlapping publications, ensuring authors’ intellectual property rights are protected.

Journal Management (Core Practice [CCP 8])

IHJ maintains an infrastructure with transparent policies, editorial independence, efficient software, and training for editorial staff. The website identifies publisher, owner, ISSNs, contact details, peer review model, and aims/scope.

• Website shows editorial board members and selection/training procedures.
• Ownership, revenue, and advertising policies are independent of editorial decisions.
• Efficient software and online platforms for archiving journal content.
• Direct marketing is ethical and transparent.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections (Core Practice [CCP 10])

IHJ allows post-publication debate via author site, letters to the editor, or external moderated sites (e.g., PubPeer). Corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern are implemented when necessary. Readers can contact the Chief Editor for discussion and corrections, which may be published as Letters to the Editor with author replies.

• Publication Decisions: The editor determines which articles proceed to review or publication. Editorial teams assist with copyright or plagiarism issues, with final consultation from the chief editor to ensure fairness.
• Complaints and Appeals: IHJ has a clear procedure for complaints about the journal, editorial staff, or publisher. Complaints regarding editorial process, citation manipulation, or unfair peer review are handled confidentially according to COPE guidelines and sent to ideahealthjournal@gmail.com
• Fair Play: Editors assess articles objectively, regardless of authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or political philosophy.
• Confidentiality: Editors and staff must not disclose information about authors or submitted manuscripts without consent.
• Reviews of Manuscripts: All submissions are checked for authenticity and plagiarism. Peer review is conducted fairly, based on reviewer expertise, and avoiding conflicts of interest.

Handling Complaints and Appeals of Author Misconduct

1. Editorial office receives a complaint about suspected research misconduct (ideahealthjournal@gmail.com).
2. The complainant specifies the misconduct with clear evidence.
3. The editorial office investigates in communication with the editor and corresponding author(s).
4. Authors respond with factual statements and evidence. Actions depend on whether the article is published or under review, e.g., erratum, retraction, or revision.
5. Nonresponse or unsatisfactory explanation may result in permanent retraction or rejection, confirmed with experts or authorities as needed.
6. The complainant is informed once the issue is resolved; the case is then considered concluded.

---

IHJ is fully committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and follows the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). IHJ has established clear, transparent, and publicly accessible policies to ensure integrity, accountability, and trust in scholarly publishing. These policies include:

• Authorship and contributorship:IHJ defines clear criteria for authorship and contributorship in accordance with COPE and ICMJE recommendations. All contributors must meet authorship requirements or be appropriately acknowledged. (COPE Authorship Guidance)
• Complaints and appeals: IHJ has a transparent mechanism for handling complaints and appeals related to editorial decisions, peer review, or publication processes. All complaints are investigated confidentially and fairly. (COPE Appeals Guidance)
• Allegations of research misconduct: Allegations such as plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, redundant publication, or unethical research practices are handled following COPE flowcharts and best practices, both before and after publication. (COPE Misconduct Guidance)
• Conflicts of interest: IHJ requires mandatory disclosure of all financial, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest by authors, reviewers, and editors to ensure transparency and unbiased decision-making. (COPE Competing Interests Guidance)
• Data sharing and reproducibility: IHJ encourages data availability, transparency, and reproducibility of research findings. Authors may be required to provide raw data, data availability statements, or repository links when applicable. (COPE Data and Reproducibility Guidance)
• Ethical oversight: All research involving human participants, animals, or sensitive data must comply with ethical standards, including institutional review board (IRB) approval and informed consent when required. (COPE Ethical Oversight Guidance)
• Intellectual property: IHJ has clear policies regarding copyright, licensing, plagiarism prevention, and protection of intellectual property rights in accordance with open-access publishing standards. (COPE Intellectual Property Guidance)
• Post-publication discussions: IHJ supports scholarly dialogue after publication through letters to the editor, reader comments, and responses from authors, ensuring constructive academic debate. (COPE Post-Publication Guidance)
• Corrections and retractions: IHJ follows COPE guidelines for issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern when errors or ethical issues are identified in published articles, ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. (COPE Retraction and Correction Guidance)

By implementing these publication ethics policies, IHJ demonstrates its commitment to ethical publishing, transparency, and the continuous improvement of the quality and integrity of the scientific literature.