Publication Ethics

Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI)

Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI) is a peer-reviewed national journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, explains what is meant by research misconduct, and outlines the roles and duties of the author, the chief editor, the editorial board, the peer reviewer, and the publisher (Unit Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat (UPPM) Institut Kesehatan Suaka Insan). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal such as Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI) 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.

Unit Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat (UPPM) Institut Kesehatan Suaka Insan as the publisher of JKSI 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, reprinting, or other commercial revenues have no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Program Studi Ilmu Keperawatan dan Profesi Ners, overall the Faculty of Institut Kesehatan Suaka Insan and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Respectful and Professional Behavior

JKSI believes in forging positive working relationships that help us build trust in science and protect the integrity of the scholarly record. We expect our staff as well as authors, reviewers, editors, and readers to treat one another with respect and dignity at all times. We do not tolerate disrespectful, inappropriate, or unprofessional behavior, or any form of discrimination, harassment, bullying, or retaliation.

Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them in resolving the complaint and addressing the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step of the process involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the co-authors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained.

For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article, are sufficient. Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI) will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

 

1. Duties of the Publisher

Guardianship of the Scholarly Record

These guidelines have been written with all these requirements in mind but especially recognizing that it is an important role of the publisher to support the huge efforts made by journal editors, and the often unsung volunteer work undertaken by peer reviewers, in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. Although ethical codes inevitably concentrate on the infractions that sometimes occur, it is a tribute to scholarly practice that the system works so well and that problems are comparatively rare. The publisher has a supporting, investing, and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications (see the STM Trade Association International Ethical Principles for Scholarly Publication and the COPE Codes of Conduct).

Unit Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat (UPPM) Institut Kesehatan Suaka Insan takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal records "the minutes of science," and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those "minutes" in all our policies, not least the ethical guidelines that we have adopted here.

UPPM is adopting these policies and procedures to support editors, reviewers, and authors in performing their ethical duties under these guidelines. We work to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions.

Systematic Manipulation of the Publishing Process

UPPM Institut Kesehatan Suaka Insan does not tolerate systematic manipulation. This may involve, for example, subverting or unduly influencing the submission, peer review, or publication process; authorship integrity violations; citation manipulation; or fabricated, reused, or implausible content.

Consistent with COPE guidance, if the burden of evidence (including direct and/or circumstantial) supports suspicions that submissions or publications have been affected by efforts to manipulate the process, we reserve the right to take action to reject (pre-publication) or retract (post-publication) an article or groups of articles. To avoid sharing intelligence with potential bad actors, findings of our investigations may not be disclosed to all parties involved.

We may notify an author's institution, employer, or funder where appropriate, and may refuse to interact with, or consider manuscript submissions from, individuals who repeatedly or seriously violate our policies. Even where authors do not respond to a post-publication investigation, the publisher may take corrective action to protect the scholarly record.

Safeguard Editorial Independence

We are committed to ensuring that the potential for advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Collaborate to Set Industry Best Practice

We promote best practice by adhering to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and providing editors with similarity check reports (plagiarism detection) for all submissions to our editorial systems.

Provide Editors with Technical, Procedural, and Legal Support

We support editors in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors and are prepared to provide specialized review and counsel if necessary.

Competing Interests for Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors of JKSI who are staff or faculty members of Institut Kesehatan Suaka Insan are required to report any competing or conflicting interests that could affect, or be perceived to affect, their editorial judgment. Competing interests must be reported as soon as they arise so that they can be assessed and mitigated or resolved.

Competing interests include both financial and non-financial interests, such as current academic affiliations, consultancies, or professional affiliations.

If editors or editorial staff members submit research papers for publication in JKSI, the editor-author must disclose the conflict to the journal upon submission. The journal will ensure that all editorial and peer-review processes are fully independent of the editor-author. In addition, editorial staff are strictly forbidden to use information acquired through their work for personal gain.

 

2. Duties of Editors or Section Editors

Statement of Principle and Editorial Independence

The following Statement of Principle speaks to a core value of intellectual freedom and independent editorial decisions. The statement is informed by the World Association of Medical Editors policy, The Relationship Between Journal Editors-in-Chief and Owners on editorial standards to which we abide.

Principle of editorial independence:

We believe strongly in ensuring that the editorial decision-making processes of our publications are kept separate from our commercial interests and we uphold editorial independence in decisions about which articles submitted to the journal shall be accepted.

These editorial decisions, or concerns or complaints about these editorial decisions, are dealt with within the editorial structures of a publication. These structures typically include editors, editors-in-chief, editorial boards, review boards, ethics committees, and ombudsmen or analogous structures for the editorial governance of any given publication. Editors and publishers will work together to manage a particular journal and will each have duties and responsibilities as discussed in our policies and set out in the editor’s contract.

Relationship Between Editors-in-Chief and Owners

Editors-in-Chief and the owners of their journals both want the journals to succeed but they have different roles. The editors-in-chief’s primary responsibilities are to inform and educate readers, with attention to the accuracy and importance of journal articles, and to protect and strengthen the integrity and quality of the journal and its processes. Owners (whether professional associations or for-profit companies) support the core values and policies of their organization and are ultimately responsible for all aspects of publishing the journal, including its staff, budget, and business policies. The relationship between owners and editors-in-chief should be based on mutual respect and trust, and recognition of each other’s authority and responsibilities. Conflicts can damage both the intellectual integrity and reputation of the journal and its financial success.

The following are guidelines for protecting the responsibility and authority of both editors-in-chief and owners:

• The conditions of the editors-in-chief's employment, including authority, responsibilities, term of appointment, reporting relationships, and mechanisms for resolving conflict, should be explicitly stated in writing and approved by both editor and owner before the editor is appointed. Those conditions bearing on editorial freedom should be shared with readers by publication in the journal or on its website.
• Editors-in-chief should have full authority over the editorial content of the journal, generally referred to as “editorial independence.” Editorial content includes original research, opinion articles and news reports, both in print or electronic format, and how and when information is published. Owners should not interfere in the evaluation, selection or editing of individual articles, either directly or by creating an environment in which editorial decisions are strongly influenced.
• Editorial decisions should be based mainly on the validity of the work and its importance to readers, not the policies or commercial success of the owner. Editors should be free to publish critical but responsible views about all aspects of medicine without fear of retribution, even if these views might conflict with the policies or commercial goals of the owner. To maintain this position, editors should seek input from a broad array of advisors such as reviewers, editorial staff, an editorial board, and readers.
• Editors-in-chief should establish procedures that guard against the influence of commercial, organizational, and personal self-interest on editorial decisions and should make these procedures clear and transparent to all interested parties. They should be compensated for their work on the journal in a manner that does not create a conflict of interest for the manuscripts they consider. 
• Owners have the right to hire and fire editors-in-chief but they should dismiss them only for substantial reasons such as a pattern of bad editorial decisions, disagreement with the long-term editorial direction of the journal, or personal behavior (such as criminal acts) that are incompatible with a position of trust. It may also be appropriate to end the editor’s service if, for whatever reason, owners and editors find they are unable to work together in a spirit of mutual trust and collaboration. Termination of an editor’s appointment should be a deliberate process, involving open discussion at the highest level of the organization, and should not be precipitous, except for egregious wrongdoing.
• The limits of editorial freedom are difficult to define in the general case. Editors should be receptive to articles representing all legitimate points of view and should be free to publish any responsible positions. However, owners cannot be expected to retain editors who take strong, consistent, one-sided positions against the core values and policies of their parent organization.
• Editors-in-chief should report to the highest governing body of the owning organization, not its administrative officers. Major decisions regarding the editor’s employment should be made by this body with open discussion and time to hear from all interested parties. Some organizations have found it useful to establish an independent oversight committee to advise them on major decisions regarding their editor and journal. Both owners and editors should have a meaningful role in appointment of members, since both are stake-holders in the committee’s effectiveness. The work of such committees should be transparent and publicly available.
• Editors should resist any actions that might compromise these principles in their journals, even if it places their own position at risk. If major transgressions do occur, all editors should participate in drawing them to the attention of the international medical, academic, and lay communities.

Publication Decisions

In making these editorial decisions, the editors working on a journal are guided by the policies of that journal, the validity of the work, research integrity and publishing ethics policies, and legal requirements in force regarding, for example, libel, copyright infringement, privacy, plagiarism, multiple submission, and fraudulent use of data. The editors of JKSI are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validity of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair Play

An editor, at any time, evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editors 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.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Editorial Process

Academic editors play a vital role in representing and upholding the journal’s profile and reputation. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. When managing the evaluation of a manuscript, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into an AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

Editors are responsible for the editorial assessment and decision-making process. AI tools cannot replace an editor’s critical thinking, independent evaluation, or final decision-making. Editors remain fully responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision, and its communication to authors. Editors may therefore only use AI tools in a supportive capacity, for example to improve the language or structure of their decision letters, or to assist with a background literature search, provided that confidentiality is maintained and human control and oversight are exercised. Editors should only use private AI tools to assist in the editorial process, as explained above. Journals will inform authors, through the Guide for Authors and editorial communications, that AI tools may be used in a supportive capacity in the editorial process.

Review of Manuscripts (Peer Review)

Each manuscript must be initially evaluated for originality by the editors. Editors should organize and use peer reviews fairly and wisely, explain their peer-review processes in the information provided to authors, and indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

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.

 

3. Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.

In addition to completing a scientific evaluation of the manuscript, a reviewer should also be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

When writing reviewer reports, reviewers are asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette. Editors reserve the right to edit reviews in their editorial decision letter or to not share reviews with authors if those reviews do not follow JKSI’s policies. This includes but is not limited to: hostile or unprofessional reviews or comments that are not scientifically constructive; biased reviews; evidence of plagiarism; evidence of generative AI use against policy; evidence of citation manipulation or citation recommendations against policy; undeclared conflicts of interest; suspected systematic manipulation; or evidence of fictitious or falsified identity, or identity theft.

Promptness

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 decline to participate in the review process.

Standards of Objectivity and Competing Interests

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should declare potential conflicts of interest to the editor before agreeing to review a manuscript and should discuss with the editor whether they need to recuse themselves because there may be a concern of potential bias. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to) collaborations between the reviewer and author(s) in the previous three years, reviewers and author(s) who are based in the same institution, and reviewers and authors who have close personal relationships or associations.

Citations

Reviewers should not suggest citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work unless the suggested citations are for genuine scientific reasons. Citation recommendations should not be made with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates). Requests for such citations can raise ethical concerns and may be seen as a conflict of interest or a source of bias.

To ensure transparency and enable editorial oversight, reviewers who suggest citations must provide complete bibliographic details and a clear justification for each recommended reference. Editors may remove citations that, in their view, are inappropriate from reviewer comments.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor. Reviewers must also respect the confidentiality of the peer review process by complying with JKSI’s policy on the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the peer review process.

Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with the editor in order to ensure that confidentiality is observed and that participants receive suitable credit.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Journal Peer Review Process

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI) upholds the highest standards of integrity in this process. When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s manuscript, it must be treated as a confidential document.

Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into an AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

Reviewers are responsible for the scientific assessment and judgment of the manuscripts they are evaluating. AI tools cannot replace a reviewer’s critical thinking or independent evaluation as there is a risk that the technology may generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions. Reviewers remain fully responsible and accountable for the content of their review reports.

AI tools may therefore only be used in a supportive capacity, for example to improve the language and structure of a review report, or to assist with a background literature search, provided that confidentiality is maintained and human control and oversight are exercised. Furthermore, reviewers should only use private AI tools to assist in the review process, as explained below.

Disclosure

Reviewers should disclose AI use in their review reports, including the tool used and purpose of the use. Basic checks for spelling and grammar do not need to be disclosed.

Suggested disclosure statement:

“During the preparation of this report, I used (NAME OF TOOL / SERVICE) in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, I reviewed and edited the content as needed and I take full responsibility for its content.”

What is a private AI tool?

When we refer to a "private" AI tool, we mean a version of an AI tool that does not retain, re-use, share, or learn from the content you submit to it. This means that when you paste or upload any content into the tool, that content should not be retained beyond what is necessary to provide the service, and must not be used to train or improve the AI model or shared with any third party.

Before using any AI tool, you should verify the following:

• Read the privacy policy and terms of service. Look specifically for statements about data retention and model training. A private tool will clearly state that user inputs are not retained beyond what is necessary to provide the service and are not used for training. In addition, users should ensure that the tool they use provides the necessary rights for publication.
• Prefer paid or enterprise versions over free tools. Many AI tools that are free to use are not private by default. We recommend checking whether your institution offers an enterprise version of a tool or a locally hosted model. Enterprise versions or locally hosted models are more likely to include privacy protection, although this is not guaranteed and should still be verified.

 

4. Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

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.

Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the research data supporting their paper for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the journal. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable number of years after publication. Authors may refer to the journal’s Guide for Authors for further details.

Originality and Acknowledgement of Sources

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 and permission has been obtained where necessary.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and that give the work appropriate context within the larger scholarly record. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a paper that has been published previously, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis or as an electronic preprint.

Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found from the ICMJE.

Citations

Authors must cite relevant, timely, and verified literature to support the claims made in their article. Citations should generally be peer-reviewed. Authors should:

• Ensure that statements in their article which rely on external sources are cited accurately.
• Avoid excessive and inappropriate citations to their own work.
• Avoid excessive and inappropriate citations to the work of other authors or institutions and not enter into arrangements to cite the work of other authors or author groups.
• Avoid excessive citations to support a single statement in their article.

We encourage the use of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) as reference links as they provide a permanent link to the electronic article referenced.

Editors and reviewers may recommend that authors consult (and potentially cite) additional sources during the peer-review process for scientific reasons. If the editor or reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the editor’s or reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the editor’s or reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates). Requests for such citations can raise ethical concerns and may be seen as a conflict of interest or a source of bias. If an author suspects citations have been suggested against this policy, then they should inform the editor (if suggested by a reviewer) or contact the publisher (if suggested by an editor).

Confidentiality

Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper

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 substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors.

Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper (e.g., language editing or medical writing), they should be recognized in the acknowledgments section.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on 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.

Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider (at their discretion) the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been submitted and the author must clearly flag any such request to the Editor. All authors must agree with any such addition, removal or rearrangement. JKSI does not allow authorship changes after acceptance.

Authors take collective responsibility for the work. Each individual author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Individual journals may have particular definitions of authorship (e.g., medical journals may follow the ICMJE definition of authorship) and authors should ensure that they comply with the policies of the relevant journal.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation - An Overview

JKSI recognizes the potential of AI tools, when used responsibly, to help researchers work efficiently, gain critical insights fast and achieve better outcomes.

Increasingly, these tools, including AI agents and deep research tools, are helping researchers to synthesize complex literature, provide an overview of a field or research question, identify research gaps, generate ideas and provide tailored support for tasks such as content organization and improving language and readability. Authors preparing a manuscript for JKSI can use AI tools to support them in these tasks. However, these tools must never be used as a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise, and evaluation.

AI tools should always be applied with human oversight and control. Ultimately, authors are responsible and accountable for the contents of their work. This includes accountability for:

• Carefully reviewing and verifying the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and impartiality of all AI-generated output (including checking the sources, as AI-generated references can be incorrect or fabricated).
• Editing and adapting all material thoroughly to ensure the manuscript represents the author’s authentic and original contribution and reflects their own analysis, interpretation, insights, and ideas.
• Ensuring the use of any tools or sources, AI-based or otherwise, is made clear and transparent to readers — for the use of AI tools we require a disclosure statement upon submission.
• Ensuring the manuscript is developed in a way that safeguards data privacy, intellectual property, and other rights, by checking the terms and conditions of any AI tool that is used.

Responsible Use of AI Tools

Authors must check the terms and conditions of any AI tool that they use to ensure that the privacy and confidentiality of their data and input, including their unpublished manuscripts, is maintained. Particular care should be taken with any personally identifiable data. Authors should check for factual errors and for any potential bias.

Authors should also check the terms and conditions of any AI tool they wish to use to ensure that they only grant to the AI tool the right to use their materials to provide the service to them and that they do not grant to the AI tool any other rights to the materials that they input into the AI tool (including without limitation the right to train the AI tool on those materials). They must also ensure that the AI tool does not impose constraints on the use of outputs from the AI tool in a way that could restrict the subsequent publication of the relevant article.

Disclosure

Authors should disclose the use of AI tools for manuscript preparation in a separate AI declaration statement included in their manuscript upon submission. This statement will appear in the published article to ensure transparency. Authors should document their use of AI, including the name of the AI tool used, the purpose of its use, and the extent of their oversight. Declaring the use of AI tools supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant AI tool.

Please note:

Basic checks of grammar, spelling, and punctuation do not need a declaration statement. However, when an AI tool makes substantive changes to sentence structure or organization of a part of the text, this should be disclosed.

In addition, authors are not required to disclose the use of AI tools or features within specialist disability-related assistive technology, provided these are used solely for accessibility purposes.

Where AI tools are used as part of the research process rather than manuscript preparation, this use should be described in detail in the Methods section.

Authors are recommended to use the following format for their declaration:

Title of section: Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process

Statement: During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the published article.

Authorship regarding AI

Authors should not list AI tools as an author or co-author, nor cite AI tools as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original and has not been previously published, that the stated authors qualify for authorship, and the work does not infringe third-party rights, and should familiarize themselves with JKSI’s Publishing Ethics policy before they submit.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools in Figures, Images, and Artwork

The use of AI tools for the creation of figures, images, and artwork is only permitted in specific circumstances. Images generally fall into three categories, and the permitted use of AI tools differs for each of these categories, as described below.

(1) Explanatory images

Explanatory images illustrate concepts, processes, or relationships (such as flow charts, decision trees, timelines, or schematic conceptual illustrations).

Authors may use AI tools to support the creation of certain types of explanatory images for publication. Where AI tools are used for this purpose, the principles of responsible use, human oversight, transparency, disclosure, and authorship, as described in the section on “Authorship” apply. The use of AI tools should be disclosed in the caption of each image (including the specific tool, version, and how the tool was used) and in the general AI disclosure statement in the article.

(2) Research and data images

Research and data images present research data or results. These include:

• 2a) Data visualizations: These present results derived from underlying datasets through analytical, computational, or statistical workflows (such as plots, charts, graphs, or heatmaps). AI tools must not be used to fabricate results, invent or alter underlying data, or generate figures that are not faithfully derived from the underlying data and methods used in the research. AI tools may be used to support the creation of data visualizations only when the visual output is directly derived from underlying data. Such visualizations must be created via reproducible analytical, computational, or statistical methods that are clearly reported within the Methods section. Authors should disclose the name of the model or tool, the version used, and the developer/manufacturer in the Methods section. Authors may be asked to provide documentation of their AI use and the original, unprocessed images for editorial assessment.
• 2b) Primary research images: These represent primary observed or experimental data (such as microscopy, histology, western blots, radiology scans, or patient images). AI tools must not be used to create or alter images that represent primary observed or experimental data that were not directly obtained in the research. This includes adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance, which should only be done using established image processing software.

Use of AI tools in research methods

This policy does not prevent the use of AI tools in formal research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches used for collection and/or interpretation of the underlying research data or predictive modeling of clinical outcomes based on patient data). Where the use of AI tools forms part of the research design or research methods, the use of the tools must be described in a reproducible manner in the Methods section.

(3) Graphical abstracts and cover art

Graphical abstracts and cover art are created to visually summarize or represent the article rather than form part of the scientific content of the manuscript.

General-purpose generative AI image tools must not be used to create graphical abstracts. Authors are encouraged to use dedicated scientific illustration tools when preparing graphical abstracts. Dedicated illustration tools offer well-defined licensing terms which support the responsible use of copyrighted and intellectual property. The use of AI tools in the creation of journal cover art may in some cases be permitted with prior permission from the journal editor and publisher.

Author responsibilities regarding Images

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and originality of all images submitted for publication. This includes verifying that the concepts presented are accurate and that all images reflect the author’s own work and ideas. Where images are based on existing artwork or graphics, appropriate attribution must be provided and permission from any relevant rights holder must be obtained before submission. Images that duplicate or refer to existing copyrighted images, real people, or others’ identifiable products or brands must not be generated, nor any likeness of an individual’s voice.

Jurisdictional Claims

JKSI respects the decisions taken by its authors as to how they choose to designate territories and identify their affiliations in their published content. JKSI’s policy is to take a neutral position with respect to territorial disputes or jurisdictional claims, including, but not limited to, maps and institutional affiliations.

• Maps: Readers should be able to locate any study areas shown within maps using common mapping platforms. Maps should only show the area actually studied and authors should not include a location map which displays a larger area than the bounding box of the study area. Authors should add a note clearly stating that "map lines delineate study areas and do not necessarily depict accepted national boundaries”. During the review process, JKSI’s editors may request authors to change maps if these guidelines are not followed.
• Institutional affiliations: Authors should use either the full, standard title of their institution or the standard abbreviation of the institutional name so that the institutional name can be independently verified for research integrity purposes.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

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.

If the work involves the use of human participants, living or deceased, including their data and/or biological materials (e.g., organs, tissues), authors must follow JKSI’s policy on Human Research. If required, authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the relevant association or legal organization (IRB).

If the work involves animal studies, authors must follow JKSI’s policy on Animal Research.

Declaration of Competing Interests

WAME defines conflict of interest as “a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities, such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behavior or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests” (see full WAME statement). All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work.

All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed, as should the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such involvement then this should be stated.

All authors should clarify anything that may cause conflicts of interest, such as work, research expenses, consultant expenses, and intellectual property, on the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) disclosure form. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

Notification of Fundamental Errors

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their 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 if deemed necessary by the editor. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains an error, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.

Image Integrity

It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Manipulating images for improved clarity is accepted, but manipulation for other purposes could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly. Authors should comply with any specific policy for graphical images applied by the relevant journal, e.g., providing the original images as supplementary material with the article, or depositing these in a suitable repository.

Clinical Trial Transparency

JKSI supports clinical trial transparency. Authors are expected to conform to industry best standards in clinical trial registration and presentation, for example, the CONSORT guidelines, as further set out in the policies of the journal.

 

5. Duties of the Copy Editor

The Copy Editor plays a crucial role in bridging the gap between the author's raw manuscript and the final polished article, ensuring the text is readable, professional, and ethically sound. Their duties include:

• Language and Clarity: Enhancing readability, grammar, spelling, and syntax without altering the scientific meaning, the integrity of the data, or the author's original intent.
• Consistency and Formatting: Ensuring adherence to JKSI's specific stylistic guidelines, including accurate citation formatting, reference structuring (e.g., APA/Vancouver style), and uniform terminology throughout the text.
• Scientific Integrity: Cross-checking data consistency between the main text, abstracts, tables, and figures to ensure no discrepancies were introduced during the drafting phase.
• Ethical Vigilance: Verifying that all required ethical declarations (such as conflict of interest statements, funding acknowledgments, ethical clearance/IRB numbers, and generative AI usage disclosures) are properly formatted and present in the manuscript. If any ethical statements are missing, the Copy Editor must flag this to the Handling Editor.
• Confidentiality: Maintaining strict confidentiality of the manuscript and the author's work during the editing process.

 

6. Duties of the Layout Editor

The Layout Editor (or Production Editor) is responsible for the final visual presentation of the accepted manuscript, transforming it into a professional format (e.g., PDF, HTML) ready for publication. Their duties include:

• Typesetting and Visual Consistency: Formatting the text, tables, and figures according to the journal's standard template while maintaining high aesthetic and professional publishing standards.
• Visual and Data Integrity: Ensuring that images, graphs, and tables are accurately rendered and not distorted, cropped inappropriately, or altered in any way that changes the scientific meaning or obscures data during the layout and conversion process.
• Galley Proofs and Author Communication: Generating galley proofs and coordinating with the corresponding author for final proofreading. The Layout Editor must ensure that only typographical, layout, or minor formatting corrections are made at this stage, preventing any unauthorized substantive changes to the accepted scientific text.
• Metadata and Accessibility: Ensuring that essential article metadata (e.g., DOIs, author affiliations, keywords, ORCID IDs) is accurately embedded in the final files to support the journal's indexing, discoverability, and long-term archiving.
• Confidentiality: Protecting the integrity and confidentiality of the pre-published galley proofs.

 

7. Complaints and Appeals

Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI) has a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, the Editorial Board, or the publisher. Complaints will be clarified to a respected person with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal’s business process, i.e., editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editors/reviewers, peer-review manipulation, etc. Complaint cases will be processed according to the COPE guidelines. Complaint cases should be sent by email to lppmstikessuakainsan@gmail.com.

 

8. Ethical Oversight

If the research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, or procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey the ethical conduct of research. If required, authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the relevant association or legal organization. If the research involves confidential data and/or business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify whether the data or information will be classified or not.

 

9. Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)

Journal policy regarding intellectual property or copyright is declared here: https://journal.stikessuakainsan.ac.id/index.php/jksi/CopyrightNotice.

 

10. Peer-Review Process Policy

Peer-Review process/policy is declared here: https://journal.stikessuakainsan.ac.id/index.php/jksi/PeerReviewProcess

 

11. Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Jurnal Keperawatan Suaka Insan (JKSI) accepts discussion of and corrections to published articles by the reader. The reader can contact the editor-in-chief by email to explain discussions and corrections. If accepted (by the editor-in-chief), the discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as letters to the editor. The respective authors can answer discussions and corrections from readers by sending their reply to the editor-in-chief. Therefore, editors may publish such answers as replies to letters to the editor.

Posted on August 09. 2026