25 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2021
    1. The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication; reviewers must treat it as confidential. It should not be retained or copied. Also, reviewers must not share the manuscript with any colleagues without the explicit permission of the editor. Reviewers and editors must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication unless they have the authors' specific permission or are writing an editorial or commentary to accompany the article.

      Etika untuk Mitra Bestari

    2. The reviewer should have identified and commented on major strengths and weaknesses of study design and methodology The reviewer should comment accurately and constructively upon the quality of the author's interpretation of the data, including acknowledgment of its limitations. The reviewer should comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as a written communication, independent of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation of the study. The reviewer should comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of low standards of scientific conduct. The reviewer should provide the author with useful suggestions for improvement of the manuscript. The reviewer's comments to the author should be constructive and professional The review should provide the editor the proper context and perspective to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) of the manuscript.

      Poin-poin yang mejadi tolok ukur mitra bestari dalam melakukan review

    3. to provide written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for the journal

      Tujuan dari peninjauan sejawat (peer-review) adalah mengetahui kekuatan dan kelemahan naskah sehingga dapat dilakukan peningkatan mutu.

    4. Authorship

      semua orang yang berkontribusi secara substansial terhadap proses perencanaan, pengumpulan data, interpretasi hasil maupun penulisan dan merevisi naskah secara kritis dan menyetujui manuskrip versi akhir dan setuju untuk bertanggung jawab atas semua aspek pekerjaan. Setiap orang yang memenuhi kriteria pertama harus diizinkan berpartisipasi dalam penyusunan dan persetujuan manuskrip versi final (ICMJE 2017). Penulis pertama haruslah seseorang yang berkontribusi paling banyak.

      https://www.ease.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/doi.10.20316.ESE_.2018.44.e1.in_.pdf

    5. Animal experiments should require full compliance with local, national, ethical, and regulatory principles, and local licensing arrangements

      Demikian juga dengan penggunaan hewan sebayak objek kajian, harus mengikuti standar etika yang berlaku (Helsinki).

    6. Journals should have explicit policies as to whether these review board approvals must be documented by the authors, or simply attested to in their cover letter, and how they should be described in the manuscript itself

      Seminimal mungkin, penulis harus menyampaikan keputusan etik dari komisi etik dan lebih ideal lagi jika menyertakan surat keputusan bebas etiknya.

    7. For those investigators who do not have access to formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed

      Jika tidak memungkinkan untuk diperoleh hasil review etik, penulis seharusnya secara explisit menjelaskan apakah pelaksanaan kajian sesuai dengan Deklarasi Helsinki atau mereka memiliki pandangan lain.

    8. Documented review and approval from a formally constituted review board (Institutional Review Board or Ethics committee) should be required for all studies involving people, medical records, and human tissues

      Penulis harus menyertakan keterangan bebas review yang diterbitkan oleh komisi etik penelitian kesehatan.

    9. Fabrication, falsification, concealment, deceptive reporting, or misrepresentation of data constitute scientific misconduct

      Untuk mencapai kualitas terbaik pada ilmu pengetahuan yang diterbitkan, kajian harus terbebas dari permasalahan etika tersebut

    1. Kepemilikan atas Kekayaan Intelektual yang dibiayaidari anggaran pendapatan dan belanja negaradan/atau anggaran pendapatan dan belanja daerahmenjadi hak Pemerintah Pusat dan,/atau PemerintahDaerah, Inventor, dan/atau lembaga penelitian danpengembangan Cari Inventor

      Pemilik KI hasil penelitian dan pengembangan yang biayanya berasal dari APBN/APBD adalah inventor, pemerintah, atau lembaga pendidikan dan pengembangan dari inventor

    2. Pengembangan adalah kegiatan untuk peningkatanmanfaat dan daya dukung Ilmu Pengetahuan danTeknologi yang telah terbukti kebenaran dankeamanannya untuk meningkatkan fungsi danmanfaat Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Teknologi.

      Pengembang ilmu pengetahuan, peningkatan manfaat dan daya dukung. Dalam hal menuliskan kajian ilmiahnya dan diterbitkan ke jurnal

  2. May 2020
    1. should be asked to recuse themselves prior to accepting a peer review invitation if they have a conflict of interest for or against the manuscript or if they are otherwise unable to review the manuscript objectively.

      Menyarankan agar mitra bestari tidak menerima review invitation jika hal-hal ini kemungkinan akan terjadi

    2. To avoid inviting peer reviewers with significant conflicts of interest, editors generally should exclude from consideration: (a) individuals who have coauthored manuscripts with the authors in the recent (e.g., 10 years) past, (b) individuals who work at the same institution as the authors, particularly if they are in the same area as an author or the institution is small, and (c) individuals who have other conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, for or against the paper (for a discussion of conflicts of interest see here).

      berarti memang editor harus memeriksa jejak digital penulis yang sedang dihandel naskahnya. Apakah pernah berhubungan dengan mitra bestari yang dimaksud?

    3. editorial board recommendations

      salah satu fungsi editorial board

    4. Editors should make every effort to find expert reviewers in the topics(s) addressed in the manuscript who are free of significant conflicts of interest.

      Editor harus berusaha agar mitra bestari yang digunakan relevan dengan tema naskah yang sedang ditangani.

    5. an editor should only use author-suggested reviewers if the editor is already familiar with the reviewers and their potential conflicts of interest and has their contact information in the journal database. Peer review of a manuscript should include at least one reviewer not suggested by the author

      Editor familiar dengan mitra bestari tersebut, memahami expertice area nya, potensi konflik kepentingan yang dapat timbul dari mitra bestari, dan kontak person mitra bestari tersebut sudah tersimpan di database jurnal.

    6. The discovery of peer review manipulation has resulted in many retractions (see discussion). In many of these instances, authors had recommended peer reviewers, either real experts in the field of their work or imaginary persons, with fake reviewer email addresses that were controlled by either the authors themselves or a third party associated with, or hired by, the authors. The editors used the authors’ suggested reviewers, including emails, and were thus deceived into sending reviewer invitations and links for submission of peer reviews to these email addresses, enabling authors or a third party related to them to submit or control reviews of their own manuscripts.

      Penjelasan detail bagaimana kecurangan penulis/pihak ke tiga yang berhubungan dengan penulis untuk mengelabui editor dalam hal identitas mitra bestari

    7. Peer review manipulation, also referred to as fraudulent peer review, can be defined as subversion of the peer review process by an author or another person engaged on behalf of the author to deceive a journal editor into sending a peer review invitation, such that the authors or a third party related to them can determine or control the contents of the review.

      Pengertian fraudulent peer review

    1. Read the Budapest Open Access Initiative

      deklarasi BOAI menekankan pentingnya diseminasi hasil penelitian secara cepat dan mengingkari adanya cost yang harus dibayar oleh pembaca dalam mengakses diseminasi tersebut.

      Dua rekomendasi yang perlu dikeluarkan,

      1. Self Archiving pada media yang dapat dibaca jejaknya oleh mesin komputer (melalui OAI-PMH), dan
      2. Open access journal yang menggunakan peer-review sebagai standarnya.
    2. it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact

      benefit of OA

  3. Apr 2020
    1. Just as authors must disclose financial relationships and conflicts of interest, reviewers have a responsibility to inform the journal editors of any such relationship or conflict

      mitra bestari perlu menginformasikan kepada editor jika dia memiliki konflik kepentingan dengan naskah yang sedang dia review

    2. Using a given journal’s standardized peer review form as a guide specific to the journal’s requirements,8 peer reviewers identify strengths and weaknesses, make suggestions for improvement, and provide recommendations to the editor

      ini fungsi reviewer form dan manfaatnya

    3. In scholarly publishing—whether for medical publications such as The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association (JAOA) or for humanities or social science research—the peer review process is the standard for assessing the quality of a manuscript and plays a large role in a journal’s editorial decisions

      Proses peninjauan sejawat menjadi standar yang diimplementasikan baik oleh penerbit 'besar' sekalipun. Dan penulis perlu memahami proses ini dengan sangat baik.

    4. In fact, most manuscripts require revision after initial review. Although approximately 50% of manuscript submissions are ultimately rejected, many can be submitted to other journals

      penolakan/diterima kebanyakan pada pra review (proses submission). Hal ini dapat disebabkan oleh karena penulis naskah tidak menyiapkannya dengan baik atau editor paling memfokuskan penilaian pada proses initial review.

  4. Mar 2020
  5. myjurnal.poltekkes-kdi.ac.id myjurnal.poltekkes-kdi.ac.id
    1. Kebanyakan Ibu menganggap Pneumonia merupakan penyakit biasa yang sering timbul dan tidak berbahaya serta bisa menghilang dengan sendirinya, padahal apabila Pneumonia yang tidak segera ditangani dapat menyebabkan kematian

      Untuk mengatakan kebanyakan ibu menganggap biasa pneumonia, perlu disandarkan sumber referensi. Dalam hal ini, penulis belum melakukannya.