Majalah Ilmu Kefarmasian

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements

Majalah Ilmu Kefarmasian (MIK) was a peer-reviewed, open access international journal that published original research, case report, case series review article, and mini review article.

This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of article publication in the MIK, including the author(s), Editor in Chief, the Editorial Board, the Managing Editor, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher (Universitas Indonesia). This statement is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication 

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed MIK 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.


As a member of COPE and the publisher of MIK, Universitas Indonesia takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and recognizes the ethical behavior and other responsibilities. Universitas Indonesia and MIK Editorial Board  are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Universitas Indonesia and MIK Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.


Research Misconduct

The Editor in Chief, the Editorial Board, and the Managing Editor will refer to Best Practice Guidelines as in The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in cases of suspected misconduct to convey the misconduct fairly. An investigation of the allegation will be conducted by the editors. If it is found to have such a research misconduct, a submitted manuscript will be rejected and a published paper will be changed as appropriate such as correction, retraction or expression of concern.

Different approaches will be conducted based on the types of research misconducts themselves. The first process involves determining the type of misconduct allegation and assessing with the publication ethics audit tool. Based on the result of the audit, the editors will develop resources to address the case.


Duties of Editors

  • The Decision for Publication. The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to MIK should be published. The manuscript will be evaluated based on its appropriateness for MIK, contribution to the discipline, cogency of analysis, conceptual breadth, clarity of presentation, and technical adequacy. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may communicate with other editors or reviewers in making the final 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, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Manuscripts submitted by members of the journal's Editorial Board are subjected to the same evaluation procedure.
  • Confidentiality. The editors and any editorial staff must treat all submitted papers as confidential, 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.
  • Review of Manuscripts. Each manuscript should be peer-reviewed before publication, taking into full account possible bias due to related or conflicting interests. Each manuscript must be initially evaluated for originality. MIK used iThenticate and Turnitin to detect the possibilities of plagiarism in the manuscript. 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 by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and may assist the authors in improving their manuscripts through editorial communications with the authors.
  • Promptness. Any invited or selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors in order to be excused from the review process and alternative reviewers can be contacted.
  • Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review are confidential and must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  • Standards of Objectivity. The review process should be conducted objectively and expressed clearly with supporting arguments so that can be used for authors to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
  • Timeliness. Reviewers are requested to complete a review process in a timely manner. If it is not possible to meet the deadline or complete the review process, the reviewers should promptly notify the editors.
  • Acknowledgment of Sources. Relevant published works that are not yet cited by the authors should be identified by the reviewers. Any statement about observation, derivation, or argument that has been reported in a previous publication should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Any substantial similarity or overlap with any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge also should be notified by reviewers to the editors.
  • Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. All reviewers should have no conflict of interest. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts over which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 


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.
  • Data Access, Retention, and Reproducibility. Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
  • Originality and Plagiarism. Authors should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others. Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. 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.
  • Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication. An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  • Acknowledgment of Sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
  • Authorship and Contributorship of the Article
    • All authors must have significantly contributed to the research. Contributors who have made less substantial contributions to the research or to the publication can be acknowledged, but should not be identified as authors.
    • The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are listed 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.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Authors must tell the Journal when they have a direct or indirect conflict of interest with editors or members of the Editorial board or International scientific committee. All authors must submit a list of references and financial support if so requested by the editorial board. All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, should be disclosed.
  • Fundamental Errors in Published Work. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her 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.