SUBMISSION
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Preventif: Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat takes concerns about research and publication integrity seriously. This policy describes how allegations involving submitted manuscripts or published articles are reported, assessed, and addressed.
An allegation does not establish that misconduct has occurred. Each concern will be assessed fairly, based on available evidence, with an opportunity for the parties involved to respond.
-
Scope
Concerns covered by this policy include:
• Fabrication or falsification of research data.
• Deceptive manipulation of images or research results.
• Plagiarism or substantial unattributed overlap.
• Undisclosed duplicate or redundant publication.
• Inappropriate inclusion or exclusion of authors.
• Misrepresentation of ethical approval or participant consent.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest that may affect interpretation.
• Manipulation of peer review or other editorial processes.
Honest errors and reasonable scientific disagreements will be distinguished from misconduct. Errors may still require correction to protect the reliability of the published record.
-
Reporting a Concern
Authors, reviewers, readers, and other parties may report concerns to:
Email: preventifjournal.fkm@gmail.com
Suggested email subject: Research Integrity Concern – Manuscript ID or Article Title
Reports should include:
• The manuscript or article title and DOI or URL, where available.
• A clear description of the concern.
• The relevant passages, figures, tables, or data.
• Supporting documents or links.
• Contact details for follow-up, where the reporting person is willing to provide them.
Anonymous reports will be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information.
-
Initial Assessment
The editorial team will assess whether the concern falls within the journal’s responsibilities and whether the available information warrants further examination.
Additional evidence or clarification may be requested. Reports will be assessed on their substance, including concerns raised after publication.
The journal will retain relevant correspondence and records of the assessment.
-
Author Response
When further examination is warranted, the journal will normally contact the corresponding author and, where appropriate, other authors.
Authors may be asked to explain the concern and provide relevant materials, such as original data, analysis records, ethical approval documents, consent information, or contribution statements. Requests must respect participant confidentiality and applicable restrictions on data sharing.
A response deadline will be communicated. Failure to respond may lead to further editorial action but does not, by itself, prove misconduct.
-
Institutional Investigation
The journal assesses the reliability of manuscripts and published articles. Formal investigations of research conduct generally fall within the responsibilities of the relevant institutions or other authorized bodies.
Where necessary, the journal may refer concerns to an institution, ethics committee, funder, or other appropriate authority and request the investigation outcome.
Editorial action may also be necessary when the reliability of an article is seriously compromised, even if misconduct has not been established.
-
Confidentiality and Independent Handling
Information will be shared only with parties who reasonably need it for assessment, investigation, or corrective action. Absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed when referral to an institution or authority is necessary.
Editors or reviewers with a conflict of interest must withdraw from handling the concern. Allegations involving an editor will be referred to an uninvolved editor or the publisher for independent handling. Anyone named in an allegation must not control its assessment.
-
Possible Outcomes
Depending on the evidence and seriousness of the concern, the journal may:
• Close the case when the concern is unsupported or adequately resolved.
• Request clarification or revision before continuing manuscript processing.
• Pause peer review or publication while an assessment is pending.
• Reject a manuscript where justified.
• Publish a correction for errors that do not invalidate the main findings.
• Publish an expression of concern when serious uncertainty remains.
• Retract an article when its findings are unreliable or other substantial grounds justify retraction.
Decisions will consider the evidence and any relevant institutional findings. Corrective notices will explain the reason for the action and identify the affected article. Retractions will be clearly labelled and linked to the original publication.
-
Communication and Reconsideration
The journal will communicate decisions to the relevant parties, subject to confidentiality restrictions. Case duration will depend on complexity and any external investigation.
Authors or reporting parties may request reconsideration by providing new evidence or identifying a material procedural error. Reconsideration will be handled by an editor or representative without a conflict of interest.
-
Guidance
In handling research integrity concerns, the journal will consult relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), as applicable.
