Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Midwifery Science is a free open access peer-reviewed six times a year Institute of Computer Science (IOCS). This professional journal provides a venue for the publication of research relevant to midwifery and the health sciences. It publishes quantitative and qualitative original articles, review articles, brief communications, case reports and letters to editors on a wide range of clinical and interdisciplinary topics:

  • Health Management
    Drug/Pharmaceutical Management
  • Pregnancy
  • Pharmacy
  • Maternal and child health & nursing
  • Childbirth
  • Adolescent health
  • Postpartum
  • Family planning
  • Newborn care
  • Hygine and Sanitization
  • Menopause & counseling and educational interventions in reproductive health and midwifery
  • Women's health & women’s empowerment and reproductive rights.
  • Screening of gynecological cancers
  • Sexual and reproductive health
  • Women's mental & psychosocial and ethical aspects of women’s health
  • Fundamental of Nursing
  • Pediatric Nursing
  • Maternity Nursing
  • Psychiatric Nursing
  • Family and Community Health Nursing
  • Critical and Intensive Care Nursing
  • Medical Surgical Nursing
  • Stunting and Child Nutrition
  • Education in nursing
  • Community service on health and midwifery
  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM)
  • Nursing science and other related fields
  • Case reports and letters to the editor in a broad range of clinical and interdisciplinary topics including
  • Community Nursing
  • Public Health
  • health Sciences
  • alternative medicine/natural medicine
  • and those that are relevant to health science.

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Science Midwifery adopts Doble blind review process which is closely monitored by the editors. Editors undertake editorial review to assess the quality and type of submission before sending it to the review process. Manuscripts not meeting the scientific standards will not be considered for the reviewing process. Authors are expected to pay attention to the instructions for authors and also indicate the category in which they are publishing if it is not a Review article. Editors will also check the readability, grammatical usage and may ask for resubmission if papers fare poorly in these parameters.

Editors request referees to advice on the scientific merit as well as the likely appeal the paper will have for broad scientometric’s readership. Editors will be in contact with the referees once paper is sent to them, with periodic reminders of their due date. Once all the reviews are in-house, the Editor handling the manuscript will most likely make a decision within a day or two. The editor will then contact the corresponding author with the decision. Reviewers invest precious time in the belief that they are making important contributions to the scientific process.

Authors can differ with the reviewer comments supported by rational explanation which will be examined by the Editor and can be sent to the said referee again. However, offensive remarks on reviewer’s comments will be subjected to the cancellation of publication

Editorial assessment is also done after the referee process is completed before finally recommending the paper for the journal or otherwise.

All efforts are done to complete the whole process within three months from submission with the first decision on an average done within 30 days to inform the status of their article.

The entire review process of the articles submitted to Science Midwifery are done online and digitally. Authors must use the online submission system for submitting their manuscript. Only if they are unable to do so they should contact the editor through email.

Submission & Peer Review Process (Key Steps)

  • Author submits all required materials, including copyright form, and separate cover letter.
  • The submitted article is first checked by the editor(s) in terms of whether it is within the broad scope of the journal and has sufficient merit. Editor(s) also pay attention to the readability, grammar and usage before considering for formally initiating the review process. The author will be informed quickly if their paper is rejected at this stage. Also there will be technical rejection if authors give their names and affiliations in the main manuscript, the tables and figures as indicated in the text is missing or have not followed instructions to authors.
  • After initial approval by the editor, Completed submission is sent out to two or three reviewers.
  • Reviewers review the article and send it back to the editorial office for processing.
  • After initial review, Editor-in-Chief releases reviews to authors.
  • Authors are asked to respond to reviewers and make necessary corrections.
  • Article is sent out for re-review.
  • Editor-in-Chief may accept, reject, accept with minor alterations, or sent out for third review.
  • If accepted, author must submit final version. Version will be added to "in-press" queue with publisher.
  • Prior to publication, publisher will sent galleys to authors. No edits may be made after galleys are approved.
 

Publication Frequency

Science Midwifery is published bi-monthly (August, October, December, February, April, June).

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Pulication Ethics

Science Midwifery is referring to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Details of guideline and international standards could be found on COPE website.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standars:
    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 behaviour and are unacceptable.
  2. Data Access and Retention:
    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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  3. Originality and Plagiaris: 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.
  4. 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 behaviour and is unacceptable.
  5. Acknowledgement 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.
  6. 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 significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. 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.
  7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
    All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  8. Fundamental errors in published works:
    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.
  9. 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.

Duties of Editors

  1. Fair Play:
    An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  2. Confidentiality:
    The editor 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.
  3. 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.
  4. Publication Decisions:
    The editor board journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. 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 confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
  5. Review of Manuscripts:
    Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor 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.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
    Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  2. 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 excuse himself from the review process
  3. Standards of Objectivity:
    Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Confidentiality:
    Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
    Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in 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 papers.
  6. Acknowledgement of Sources:
    Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
 

Screening Plagiarism

Manuscripts submitted to this journal will be checked to avoid plagiarism by using Turnitin. articles that will be processed are those whose similarity test results are no more than 20%, and each source is no more than 1%. Turnitin provides tools to assist with originality checks to prevent plagiarism, checking writing for misquotes or improper copying with personalized feedback.

 

Digital Archiving

This journal utilizes the Indonesia One Search (IOS), Indonesian Publication Index (IPI), GARUDA, GS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.