Ethical Publication

Jurnal Keluarga Berencana is a publication by the National Population and Family Planning Board (BKKBN), which upholds the values of honesty and strictly avoids plagiarism. Jurnal Keluarga Berencana is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes articles to advance coherent scientific studies or research. It is crucial to adhere to ethical standards of behavior for all parties involved in the publishing process: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the community.

This Statement of Scholarly Publishing Ethics outlines the ethical rules for all parties involved in the publication process of this scientific journal, namely the Editorial Board, Peer Reviewers, and Authors. The Code of Scholarly Publishing Ethics fundamentally adheres to three values of publishing ethics: (i) Impartiality, which entails being free from conflicts of interest in publication management; (ii) Fairness, which involves granting authorship rights to those who rightfully deserve them; and (iii) Honesty, which means no duplication, forgery, falsification, or plagiarism in publications.

After reading this Statement of Scholarly Publishing Ethics, please download the Ethics Statement and Copyright Agreement. Kindly sign and submit the Ethics Statement as part of your initial article submission. The Copyright Agreement must be submitted before the article can be published. The Ethics Statement and Copyright Agreement can be sent via mail, email, or fax.

The National Population and Family Planning Board (BKKBN) as the publisher ofJurnal Keluarga Berencana is committed to ethical standards at all stages of the publishing process, and we are aware of ethical responsibilities and other duties. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial revenues do not impact or influence editorial decisions.

Author responsibilities:

Writing standards: Authors must present scientific papers based on accurate data and methodology. Manuscripts must not replicate the work of others. Each manuscript must contain sufficient details and references to enable others to reference the work. Dishonest or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior. Professional publications reviews and articles must also be accurate and objective, and the work must be clearly identified.

Access and data retention: Authors may be requested to provide raw data related to the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if possible, and should, in any case, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism: Authors must 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 takes many forms, ranging from copying, claiming, or using part or all of someone else's writing, including one's own previously published writing by another publisher. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable. The publisher reserves the right to reject papers that are not original and are found to contain elements of plagiarism.

Duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous publication: An author should not, generally, publish manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable. Generally, an author should not submit a previously published paper for consideration in another journal. Publication of some types of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal may sometimes be justified, provided certain conditions are met. The author and the editor of the relevant journal must agree to secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation as the primary document. Primary references must be cited in the secondary publication.

Source acknowledgment: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite influential publications in determining the nature of the work reported. Information obtained personally, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, should not be used or reported without written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as referee manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without clear written permission from the authors of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study reported. 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.

Hazards and human or animal subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must identify them clearly in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the authors should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in accordance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experiments involving human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects should always be observed.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All authors should disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that may be interpreted to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancy, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their 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. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the author's responsibility to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor regarding the correctness of the original paper.

Editorial Board responsibilities

Publication decisions: The Editorial Board of Jurnal Keluarga Berencana responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. Validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the journal's editorial policy and constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fairness: An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality: Editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate actions should be taken, such as publication of retractions or expressions of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations: An editor should take reasonable responsive steps when ethical complaints have been raised about a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such steps will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the complaint or claims made, but may also include further communication to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, publication of corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other relevant notes, as may be applicable. Any unethical publishing behavior reported should be examined, even if found years after publication.

Reviewer responsibilities

Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with the authors can also assist the authors in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scientific communication and is at the heart of the scientific method.

Timeliness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a rapid review is not possible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality: Manuscripts submitted for review should be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.

Objectivity standards: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Source acknowledgment: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported should be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they are aware of personally.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the written consent of the author. Special 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 associated with the paper.