Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to GENCARE: Journal of Health Empowerment and Community Innovation undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the journal’s requirements are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers through a double-blind peer review process. The journal safeguards the identities of authors and reviewers during review to support fair, objective, and evidence-based editorial assessment.

Reviewers are selected for expertise relevant to the journal’s focus, particularly nursing, midwifery, patient and family empowerment, health education, and participatory community-based health programs. Evaluation considers the significance of identified community needs, program methods, meaningful participation, documented outcomes, ethical safeguards, practical benefits, and potential sustainability.

The initial editorial screening normally takes approximately 1–2 weeks. Once reviewers accept their invitations, an initial review round generally takes 4–6 weeks. These durations are indicative service targets, not verified historical averages. The overall time to a decision may vary according to reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and additional review rounds.

Submission to GENCARE does not guarantee acceptance. In cases of unexpected delays, authors will be informed accordingly and may choose to withdraw their manuscript if they wish.

Initial Screening (Pre-Review)

Upon submission to GENCARE, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening conducted by the Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor. This stage typically takes 1–2 weeks and evaluates:

  • Alignment with the journal's focus and scope
  • Compliance with author and submission guidelines
  • Originality and scholarly quality
  • Relevance of the community or partner health problem
  • Clarity of the community service intervention or empowerment program
  • Ethical compliance and publication integrity
  • Completeness of manuscript structure and supporting documentation

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software such as Turnitin or iThenticate. GENCARE applies a maximum similarity threshold of 20%.

A similarity score at or below 20% does not automatically demonstrate originality or rule out plagiarism. Similarity reports are assessed contextually, taking into account correctly attributed quotations, reference lists, standard terminology, and the extent and nature of text overlap. Plagiarism, redundant publication, unattributed reuse of content, or other substantive ethical concerns may lead to revision or rejection regardless of the numerical similarity score.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening proceed to the formal peer-review stage.

Assignment of Reviewers

After passing the initial screening, a Section Editor or Handling Editor is assigned to manage the manuscript, typically within 1–3 days. The editor then appoints at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise, usually within one week.

To support the double-blind review process, authors must remove identifying details from the manuscript file submitted for review, including names, affiliations, acknowledgements, and identifying document metadata. Author information should be supplied separately through the journal’s submission system. Editors will review the anonymized file before sending it to reviewers.

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Expertise relevant to the manuscript topic
  • Experience in health sciences or community service
  • Academic and/or professional qualifications
  • Experience in community-based health programs where applicable
  • Absence of conflicts of interest

Where possible, reviewers are affiliated with institutions different from those of the authors to maintain objectivity and impartiality.

Review Process

Once reviewers accept the invitation, they are generally given approximately 4–6 weeks to complete the evaluation.

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

  • Relevance and significance of the community health problem
  • Originality and innovation of the community service program
  • Clarity of objectives and target population or community partners
  • Appropriateness of the intervention, empowerment strategy, or health activity
  • Meaningful participation of community members or partners
  • Clarity and appropriateness of implementation procedures
  • Appropriateness of program evaluation methods
  • Accuracy and clarity of reported results
  • Demonstrated benefits or impact for the target community
  • Ethical appropriateness and participant protection
  • Potential sustainability, replication, or development of the program
  • Quality of discussion and linkage with relevant scientific literature
  • Clarity, organization, and quality of academic writing
  • Overall contribution to community service and health practice

Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

The time required for additional review depends on the extent of the revision. Manuscripts undergoing major revision may be sent back to external reviewers, and a new review round may take approximately 4–6 weeks after the revised manuscript is received and reviewers accept the invitation.

Editorial Decision

After the peer-review reports are received, the Handling Editor assesses the reviewers’ comments and makes an editorial recommendation. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final editorial decision, taking into account the reviewers’ assessments, the journal’s scope, the integrity of the work, and any relevant ethical concerns. This stage generally takes approximately one week.

If substantial discrepancies occur between reviewer evaluations, the editor may invite an additional reviewer to provide an independent assessment.

Possible editorial decisions include:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

The editorial decision is communicated to the authors through the journal's online submission system together with anonymized reviewer comments.

Revision Process

If revisions are required, authors are generally given:

  • Minor Revision: 2 weeks
  • Major Revision: 4 weeks

Authors must submit:

  1. A revised manuscript with changes clearly indicated
  2. A response-to-reviewers letter addressing each reviewer comment point-by-point

For major revisions, the revised manuscript is generally returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation. For minor revisions, the Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor may make the final decision without additional external review.

Additional revision rounds may be conducted until the manuscript meets the journal's scientific, ethical, editorial, and community-service standards.

Publication Process

After a manuscript is formally accepted by the Editor-in-Chief, it proceeds to the production stage. The manuscript undergoes copyediting, proofreading, and layout formatting by the editorial team, usually within 1–2 weeks, to ensure clarity, consistency, and adherence to GENCARE standards.

Authors will then review the final proof and confirm the accuracy of names, affiliations, content, tables, figures, and other publication details. Authors must also complete any required copyright and publication agreement forms.

After approval of the final proof, accepted articles are scheduled for publication in the appropriate GENCARE issue. The journal publishes twice annually, in March and September. Publication dates depend on the issue schedule and production readiness; publication immediately after proof approval is not guaranteed.

Through this structured and transparent editorial workflow, GENCARE seeks to uphold academic integrity, publication ethics, community relevance, and scholarly quality while disseminating evidence-based health empowerment programs within its defined nursing- and midwifery-oriented scope.

GENCARE peer review workflow (verify diagram content and branding)

Proses Peer Review

Naskah yang dikirimkan ke GENCARE: Journal of Health Empowerment and Community Innovation terlebih dahulu menjalani skrining editorial. Naskah yang memenuhi persyaratan selanjutnya ditelaah oleh sekurang-kurangnya dua reviewer independen melalui sistem double-blind peer review. Identitas penulis dan reviewer dijaga kerahasiaannya selama penelaahan guna mendukung proses editorial yang adil, objektif, dan berbasis bukti.

Reviewer dipilih berdasarkan kompetensi yang relevan dengan fokus jurnal, khususnya keperawatan, kebidanan, pemberdayaan pasien dan keluarga, pendidikan kesehatan, serta program kesehatan partisipatif berbasis masyarakat. Penilaian meliputi urgensi kebutuhan masyarakat, metode pelaksanaan, partisipasi bermakna, hasil yang terdokumentasi, perlindungan etik, manfaat praktis, dan potensi keberlanjutan program.

Skrining editorial awal biasanya membutuhkan waktu sekitar 1–2 minggu. Setelah reviewer menerima undangan, satu putaran penelaahan awal umumnya berlangsung sekitar 4–6 minggu. Rentang waktu tersebut merupakan target layanan, bukan rata-rata historis yang telah diverifikasi. Waktu keseluruhan hingga keputusan editorial dapat berubah sesuai ketersediaan reviewer, kompleksitas naskah, dan kebutuhan penelaahan lanjutan.

Pengiriman naskah ke GENCARE tidak menjamin penerimaan. Apabila terjadi keterlambatan yang tidak terduga, penulis akan diberi informasi dan dapat memilih untuk menarik naskahnya apabila diperlukan.

Skrining Awal (Pra-Review)

Setelah dikirim ke GENCARE, setiap naskah akan menjalani skrining awal oleh Editor-in-Chief atau Handling Editor. Tahap ini biasanya memerlukan waktu 1–2 minggu dan meliputi penilaian terhadap:

  • Kesesuaian dengan fokus dan ruang lingkup jurnal
  • Kepatuhan terhadap author guidelines dan ketentuan submission
  • Orisinalitas dan kualitas ilmiah naskah
  • Relevansi masalah kesehatan yang dihadapi masyarakat atau mitra
  • Kejelasan bentuk intervensi, pemberdayaan, atau kegiatan pengabdian
  • Kepatuhan terhadap prinsip etika dan integritas publikasi
  • Kelengkapan struktur naskah dan dokumen pendukung

Seluruh naskah diperiksa menggunakan perangkat deteksi plagiarisme seperti Turnitin atau iThenticate. GENCARE menerapkan batas maksimal similaritas sebesar 20%.

Skor similaritas sebesar 20% atau kurang tidak secara otomatis membuktikan orisinalitas maupun meniadakan plagiarisme. Laporan similaritas ditelaah secara kontekstual dengan memperhatikan kutipan yang diatribusikan dengan benar, daftar pustaka, terminologi baku, serta sifat dan tingkat kesamaan teks. Plagiarisme, publikasi redundan, penggunaan ulang materi tanpa atribusi, atau pelanggaran etik substansial dapat mengakibatkan revisi atau penolakan tanpa bergantung semata-mata pada persentase similaritas.

Naskah yang lolos skrining awal akan dilanjutkan ke tahap peer review formal.

Penugasan Reviewer

Setelah lolos skrining awal, seorang Section Editor atau Handling Editor akan ditugaskan untuk menangani naskah, biasanya dalam waktu 1–3 hari. Editor kemudian menunjuk setidaknya dua reviewer independen yang memiliki keahlian relevan, biasanya dalam waktu satu minggu.

Untuk mendukung double-blind peer review, penulis wajib menghapus informasi identitas dari berkas naskah yang akan ditelaah, termasuk nama, afiliasi, ucapan terima kasih, dan metadata dokumen yang mengungkap identitas. Informasi penulis disampaikan secara terpisah melalui sistem pengiriman naskah OJS. Editor akan memeriksa anonimitas berkas sebelum mengirimkannya kepada reviewer.

Reviewer dipilih berdasarkan:

  • Keahlian yang relevan dengan topik naskah
  • Pengalaman di bidang kesehatan atau pengabdian kepada masyarakat
  • Kualifikasi akademik dan/atau profesional
  • Pengalaman dalam program kesehatan berbasis masyarakat apabila relevan
  • Tidak adanya konflik kepentingan

Jika memungkinkan, reviewer berasal dari institusi yang berbeda dengan penulis untuk menjaga objektivitas dan imparsialitas.

Proses Review

Setelah menerima undangan review, reviewer diberikan waktu sekitar 4–6 minggu untuk menyelesaikan evaluasi.

Reviewer menilai naskah berdasarkan:

  • Relevansi dan signifikansi permasalahan kesehatan masyarakat atau mitra
  • Orisinalitas dan inovasi program pengabdian
  • Kejelasan tujuan dan sasaran kegiatan
  • Kesesuaian intervensi, metode pemberdayaan, atau kegiatan kesehatan
  • Keterlibatan bermakna masyarakat atau mitra
  • Kejelasan dan kelayakan proses pelaksanaan program
  • Kesesuaian metode evaluasi kegiatan
  • Keakuratan dan kejelasan hasil yang dilaporkan
  • Manfaat atau dampak yang dihasilkan bagi masyarakat
  • Kepatuhan terhadap prinsip etika dan perlindungan peserta
  • Potensi keberlanjutan, replikasi, atau pengembangan program
  • Kualitas pembahasan dan keterkaitan dengan literatur ilmiah
  • Kejelasan, sistematika, dan kualitas penulisan akademik
  • Kontribusi terhadap pengembangan pengabdian kepada masyarakat di bidang kesehatan

Reviewer memberikan komentar konstruktif dan merekomendasikan salah satu keputusan berikut:

  • Diterima
  • Revisi Minor
  • Revisi Mayor
  • Ditolak

Lama penelaahan tambahan bergantung pada jenis dan cakupan revisi. Naskah dengan revisi mayor dapat dikirim kembali kepada reviewer eksternal; putaran penelaahan berikutnya dapat memerlukan sekitar 4–6 minggu setelah naskah revisi diterima dan undangan penelaahan disetujui.

Keputusan Editorial

Setelah laporan penelaahan diterima, Handling Editor mengevaluasi komentar reviewer dan menyampaikan rekomendasi editorial. Editor-in-Chief bertanggung jawab atas keputusan editorial akhir dengan mempertimbangkan hasil penelaahan, ruang lingkup jurnal, integritas karya, dan persoalan etik yang relevan. Tahap ini umumnya memerlukan waktu sekitar satu minggu.

Apabila terdapat perbedaan substansial antara hasil penilaian reviewer, editor dapat menunjuk reviewer tambahan untuk memberikan penilaian independen.

Kemungkinan keputusan editorial meliputi:

  • Diterima
  • Revisi Minor
  • Revisi Mayor
  • Ditolak

Keputusan disampaikan kepada penulis melalui sistem submission online jurnal beserta komentar reviewer yang telah dianonimkan.

Proses Revisi

Apabila revisi diperlukan, penulis diberikan batas waktu:

  • Revisi Minor: 2 minggu
  • Revisi Mayor: 4 minggu

Penulis harus mengirimkan:

  1. Naskah revisi dengan perubahan yang ditandai secara jelas
  2. Surat tanggapan kepada reviewer yang menjawab komentar reviewer secara point-by-point

Untuk revisi mayor, naskah hasil revisi umumnya dikembalikan kepada reviewer awal untuk evaluasi lanjutan. Untuk revisi minor, Editor-in-Chief atau Handling Editor dapat mengambil keputusan akhir tanpa review eksternal tambahan.

Putaran revisi tambahan dapat dilakukan hingga naskah memenuhi standar ilmiah, etika, editorial, dan pengabdian kepada masyarakat yang ditetapkan GENCARE.

Proses Publikasi

Setelah naskah secara resmi diterima oleh Editor-in-Chief, naskah akan masuk ke tahap produksi. Naskah melalui proses copyediting, proofreading, dan layout formatting oleh tim editorial, biasanya dalam waktu 1–2 minggu, untuk memastikan kejelasan, konsistensi, dan kesesuaian dengan standar GENCARE.

Penulis kemudian memeriksa proof final dan mengonfirmasi keakuratan nama, afiliasi, isi naskah, tabel, gambar, dan informasi publikasi lainnya. Penulis juga harus melengkapi dokumen hak cipta dan perjanjian publikasi yang diperlukan.

Setelah final proof disetujui, artikel yang diterima dijadwalkan pada edisi GENCARE yang sesuai. Jurnal terbit dua kali setahun, pada bulan Maret dan September. Tanggal publikasi mengikuti jadwal edisi dan kesiapan produksi; publikasi langsung setelah persetujuan proof tidak dijamin.

Melalui alur editorial yang terstruktur dan transparan, GENCARE berupaya menjaga integritas akademik, etika publikasi, relevansi bagi masyarakat, dan mutu ilmiah dalam diseminasi program pemberdayaan kesehatan berbasis bukti sesuai fokus jurnal pada keperawatan dan kebidanan.

Diagram alur peer review GENCARE (perlu verifikasi isi dan identitas visual)