Peer Review Process and Policy
All manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Ilmiah Kebidanan (The Journal of Midwifery) undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific contribution of published articles.
The journal implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.
1. Initial Screening
After submission, manuscripts are checked by the editorial staff to ensure that all submission requirements have been fulfilled. This administrative screening is usually completed within one week.
Manuscripts that do not meet the submission requirements will be returned to the authors for completion. Authors are given two weeks to fulfill the missing requirements. Failure to complete the requirements within the specified period may result in the manuscript being rejected without external peer review.
The editor then conducts an initial evaluation to determine whether the manuscript falls within the journal's focus and scope and whether it has any major methodological concerns. This evaluation may take up to four weeks.
2. External Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and independence to promote objectivity and scientific quality.
Effective November 1, 2026, all new manuscript submissions that pass the initial editorial screening will undergo peer review by three independent reviewers.
Manuscripts initially submitted before November 1, 2026, will continue to follow the previous peer review procedure involving two independent reviewers.
The applicable peer review procedure is determined by the manuscript's initial submission date, regardless of the issue in which the manuscript is eventually published.
3. Review Decision
Based on the reviewers' evaluations, a manuscript may receive one of the following editorial decisions:
- Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted without further substantive revisions.
- Revisions Required (Minor): The manuscript requires limited revisions before a final editorial decision is made.
- Resubmit for Review (Major): The manuscript requires substantial revisions and further evaluation before an acceptance decision can be made.
- Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected because it does not meet the journal's publication requirements.
The corresponding author will receive the reviewers' comments and recommendations and, where applicable, will be given an opportunity to revise the manuscript.
4. Revision Process
Authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers' recommendations and resubmit the revised version within the specified period.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.
Editorial decisions, including acceptance, revision requests, or rejection, are communicated to the corresponding author in writing.
5. Final Editorial Decision
The final decision regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated handling editor authorized to make editorial decisions.
Editorial decisions are based on reviewers' recommendations, the scientific quality and originality of the manuscript, compliance with publication ethics, and relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
When reviewers provide substantially conflicting recommendations, the editor may seek an additional independent assessment before making a final decision.
The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's editorial team and is not determined solely by the number of positive or negative reviewer recommendations.
6. Review Timeline
The peer review process may take up to three months, depending on reviewer availability and the extent of revisions required.
If authors do not complete the revision process within six months, the journal reserves the right to terminate the submission process.
7. Confidentiality and Ethical Standards
All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose unpublished manuscript information to unauthorized parties.
Editors and reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through the peer review process for personal advantage.
The journal is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and follows internationally recognized ethical principles in scholarly publishing.
8. Conflict of Interest
Editors and reviewers are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could compromise the objectivity and integrity of the peer review process.
Reviewers must decline review invitations when conflicts of interest may affect their impartiality.
Editors with relevant conflicts of interest must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript. The manuscript will be reassigned to another qualified editor.
