MENU
Peer Reviewer Process
Jurnal Pembangunan Kota Medan (JPKM) is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. Each paper submitted to Jurnal Pembangunan Kota Medan (JPKM) for publication is subject to peer review. A peer review in this journal is an evaluation of a paper submitted by two or more individuals who have similar competence to the author. It aims to determine the feasibility of scientific papers to be published. The peer review method is used to maintain quality standards and give credibility to the paper. Peer review at Jurnal Pembangunan Kota Medan (JPKM) proceeds in 9 steps with the following description.
1. Paper Submission
Corresponding authors or submitting papers to journals. This is done through an online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS). However, to make it easier for authors, Jurnal Pembangunan Kota Medan (JPKM) journal also accepts paper submissions via email.
2. Editorial Office Assessment
Papers submitted are first rated by Jurnal Pembangunan Kota Medan (JPKM) Journal Editor. Editor checks whether it fits the focus and scope of the Journal. The composition and arrangement of the paper is evaluated against the journal's Author Guidelines to ensure it includes the necessary sections and style of language. In addition, an assessment of the minimum quality of papers required for publication begins at this step, including an assessment of whether there are major methodological weaknesses. Any submitted papers that pass this step will be checked by Turnitin for plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.
3. Assessment by Editor in Chief
The Editor in Chief checks whether the paper is suitable for the journal, is original, interesting and significant enough for publication. Otherwise, the paper may be rejected without further review.
4. Invitation for Reviewers
The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes will be appropriate reviewers (also known as referees) based on expertise, proximity of research interests, and no consideration of conflicts of interest. Peer review process at Jurnal Pembangunan Kota Medan (JPKM) involve a community of experts in a narrowly defined field. Contains the results of publications or thoughts in the field of medical carried out by Researchers, Doctor, nurses and medical Practitioners.
5. Response to Invitation
Potential reviewers consider the invitation to be against their own expertise, conflict of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or reject. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for suggestions from an alternative reviewer, when he or she refuses to review.
6. Review Conducted
The reviewer allocates time to read the paper several times. The first reading is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are discovered at this stage, reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper a few more times, taking notes to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or with a request for revision (usually marked as major or minor) before reconsideration.
7. Journal Evaluating Reviews
The Editor-in-Chief and the managing editor considers all returned reviews before making an overall decision. If reviews differ greatly between the two reviewers, the handling editor may invite additional reviewers for additional opinions before making a decision.
8. Decision Communicated
The editor emails the decision to the author including relevant reviewer comments. Reviewer comments are sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take necessary action and response. At this point, reviewers are also sent an email or letter notifying them of the results of their review.
9. Final Step
If accepted, the paper is sent to copy-editing. If the article is rejected or sent back to the author for major or minor revisions, the editor in charge will include constructive comments from the reviewer to help the author improve the article. Authors should make corrections and revise the paper in accordance with reviewers' comments and instructions.
