Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Statement of Publication Ethics

Research of Service Administration Health and Sains Healthys (REHAT) is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, accountability, and ethical responsibility throughout the scholarly publication process.

The journal's publication ethics policies are informed by the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and internationally recognized principles of responsible research and scholarly publishing.

This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement establishes the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in scholarly publishing, including authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and the publisher.

REHAT is committed to preventing, identifying, investigating, and addressing publication misconduct while protecting the integrity of the scientific record.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are expected to comply with applicable ethical requirements, established scientific standards, and the policies described below.

2. Responsibilities of Editors

The Editor-in-Chief and editorial team are responsible for ensuring that the journal maintains high standards of scientific quality, editorial independence, fairness, and ethical publishing.

Editors are expected to:

  • evaluate submissions based on scientific originality, academic merit, methodological quality, relevance, and potential contribution to knowledge;

  • make editorial decisions without discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, political views, or other unrelated personal characteristics;

  • maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and associated editorial communications;

  • organize a fair, transparent, and independent peer-review process;

  • select reviewers with appropriate scientific expertise and without disqualifying conflicts of interest;

  • ensure that authors have a reasonable opportunity to respond to reviewer comments and editorial concerns;

  • protect editorial decisions from inappropriate commercial, institutional, political, or personal influence;

  • investigate credible allegations of research or publication misconduct; and

  • take appropriate corrective action when significant errors or ethical violations are identified before or after publication.

Editors must not use unpublished information obtained through the editorial process for personal research or professional advantage without the authors' explicit written permission.

Editors must withdraw from handling manuscripts when personal, professional, financial, or institutional relationships create an actual or reasonably perceived conflict of interest.

The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or a duly authorized independent editor and must be based on scholarly and ethical considerations.

3. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers play an essential role in evaluating the scientific validity, originality, relevance, clarity, and methodological rigor of submitted manuscripts.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • accept review assignments only when they possess appropriate subject expertise and can complete the evaluation within a reasonable period;

  • provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and professionally expressed comments;

  • assess the suitability of the study design, research methods, analysis, interpretation, and conclusions;

  • identify important methodological weaknesses, unsupported claims, and relevant scientific literature;

  • notify the editor of suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, unethical research practices, or other serious concerns;

  • disclose potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment;

  • maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts, associated materials, and editorial communications; and

  • refrain from using unpublished findings or privileged manuscript information for personal benefit.

Reviewers must not share, reproduce, distribute, or upload confidential manuscripts to unauthorized third-party platforms or artificial intelligence systems.

Reviewers must not request unnecessary citations to their own publications or engage in coercive citation practices.

Personal criticism, discriminatory remarks, and unsupported allegations are unacceptable in peer-review reports.

4. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and ethical conduct of the research presented in their manuscripts.

By submitting a manuscript to REHAT, authors confirm that:

  • the work is original and represents an honest and accurate account of the research conducted;

  • the manuscript has not been published previously in substantially the same form, except where prior dissemination is permitted and appropriately disclosed;

  • the manuscript is not under consideration for publication by another journal;

  • research methods, data sources, analytical procedures, and limitations are described accurately and transparently;

  • all relevant sources, datasets, and intellectual contributions have been properly acknowledged;

  • all listed authors meet appropriate authorship criteria and approve the submitted manuscript;

  • required research ethics approvals, permissions, and informed consent have been obtained or appropriately waived;

  • financial support and potential conflicts of interest have been disclosed;

  • the manuscript does not contain fabricated, falsified, plagiarized, or deliberately misleading content; and

  • any substantial errors discovered during review or after publication are promptly reported to the editorial office.

Authors must cooperate with reasonable editorial requests for clarifications, supporting documentation, original research records, or explanations concerning research integrity.

5. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must reflect genuine and substantial intellectual contributions to the research.

REHAT follows internationally recognized principles of responsible authorship, including those reflected in the ICMJE recommendations.

Individuals identified as authors should satisfy all of the following criteria:

  1. Make a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the study, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of research data.

  2. Participate in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content.

  3. Approve the final version submitted for publication.

  4. Agree to be accountable for their own contributions and to cooperate in resolving questions concerning the integrity or accuracy of the work.

Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be appropriately acknowledged, with their permission.

The following practices are unacceptable:

  • Ghost authorship

  • Gift authorship

  • Guest authorship

  • Honorary authorship

  • Deliberate exclusion of qualified contributors

  • Unauthorized changes to author lists

Any proposed addition, removal, or reordering of authors after submission must be justified and approved by all affected authors, subject to editorial review.

Authors are encouraged to provide a statement describing their individual contributions using recognized contributor-role terminology, such as the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT).

6. Originality, Plagiarism, and Similarity Screening

REHAT requires submitted manuscripts to demonstrate originality and appropriate acknowledgment of previous scholarly work.

The journal screens submitted manuscripts using plagiarism-detection software, including Turnitin, as part of the initial editorial evaluation.

Unacceptable practices include:

  • copying another author's text, ideas, data, or findings without appropriate attribution;

  • presenting previously published material as original work;

  • inappropriate reuse of substantial portions of an author's own published work without disclosure;

  • paraphrasing another author's work without proper citation;

  • reproducing tables, figures, images, or other copyrighted content without necessary permission or appropriate attribution; and

  • manipulating citations or references to conceal the origin of scholarly material.

Similarity reports are evaluated in context. A numerical similarity percentage alone does not establish plagiarism or determine whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected.

Manuscripts containing substantial plagiarism or other serious originality violations may be rejected. Allegations involving published articles will be investigated and addressed through appropriate corrective action.

7. Duplicate Submission and Redundant Publication

REHAT does not accept simultaneous submission of substantially the same manuscript to multiple journals.

Authors must disclose any closely related publications, manuscripts, conference papers, preprints, or other forms of prior dissemination that may overlap with the submitted work.

Redundant publication, unjustified fragmentation of research findings, and misleading presentation of previously reported data as independent new evidence are unacceptable.

Prior dissemination as a preprint does not automatically constitute duplicate publication, provided it is transparently disclosed and complies with the journal's applicable preprint and copyright policies.

Editors may request related manuscripts or publications to assess the originality and distinct contribution of a submission.

8. Research Integrity and Data Accuracy

Authors must report research procedures, observations, analyses, and findings accurately and without deliberate distortion.

REHAT considers the following practices serious violations of research integrity:

  • fabrication of research data or results;

  • falsification, selective alteration, or manipulation of findings;

  • inappropriate manipulation of scientific images or figures;

  • deliberate omission of findings intended to mislead readers;

  • misrepresentation of participant characteristics, samples, statistical analyses, or experimental procedures;

  • misrepresentation of ethical approvals or research permissions;

  • fabrication of references or use of nonexistent sources; and

  • intentional misrepresentation of research methods or study outcomes.

Authors must retain original research records and relevant supporting documentation in accordance with institutional requirements and applicable regulations.

Where reasonable concerns arise, the editorial team may request supporting data, methodological explanations, ethics approvals, or relevant documentation.

9. Ethical Approval for Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, patients, identifiable health information, or human biological materials must comply with applicable legal, institutional, and internationally recognized ethical requirements.

Studies involving human participants must respect the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and other relevant ethical standards.

Where required, authors must obtain approval from an authorized research ethics committee or institutional review board before conducting the research.

Manuscripts should clearly report:

  • the name of the approving ethics committee or institutional review board;

  • the ethics approval number or reference identifier, when available;

  • the approval date, when relevant;

  • the informed consent procedures used; and

  • any approved waiver of ethics review or informed consent, where applicable.

For studies that qualify for an exemption or waiver, authors must explain the applicable basis and provide relevant institutional or ethics committee documentation where required.

The journal reserves the right to request copies of ethics approvals, consent documentation, or supporting information when necessary.

Ethics committee approval does not automatically guarantee the ethical acceptability of a manuscript. Editors may independently assess ethical concerns arising from the conduct or reporting of the study.

10. Informed Consent, Patient Privacy, and Confidentiality

Authors must respect the dignity, autonomy, privacy, and confidentiality of all research participants and patients.

Informed consent to participate in research must be obtained where required by applicable ethical and legal standards.

Identifiable patient information, clinical images, photographs, videos, case descriptions, and other potentially identifying materials must not be published without appropriate written consent for publication.

Authors should remove unnecessary personal identifiers and employ appropriate anonymization or de-identification procedures.

Consent to participate in a study does not necessarily constitute consent to publish identifiable personal information. Separate consent for publication may therefore be required.

Research involving children, individuals with impaired decision-making capacity, or other vulnerable populations must incorporate appropriate safeguards and legally valid consent or assent procedures.

11. Clinical Trials and Research Reporting Standards

Clinical trials submitted to REHAT must comply with applicable ethical and scientific requirements.

Prospective clinical trials should be registered in a publicly accessible and recognized clinical trial registry at or before the enrollment of the first participant, consistent with ICMJE recommendations.

Clinical trial manuscripts must provide the trial registration name and registration identifier.

Authors are expected to follow appropriate research reporting standards, where applicable, including:

  • CONSORT for randomized clinical trials;

  • STROBE for observational studies;

  • PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses;

  • CARE for clinical case reports; and

  • other established reporting guidelines relevant to specific research designs.

Authors must report methods and findings transparently, including important limitations and relevant negative or inconclusive results.

12. Animal Research, Laboratory Research, and Biosafety

Research involving animals must comply with applicable national regulations, institutional policies, and internationally recognized standards for humane animal care and use.

Where required, authors must obtain approval from an authorized animal ethics committee and report relevant approval information.

Animal studies should follow appropriate reporting standards, including ARRIVE where applicable.

Laboratory, biomedical, pharmaceutical, and experimental studies must observe applicable biosafety requirements and relevant institutional research procedures.

The journal may request additional ethical or regulatory documentation when concerns arise regarding animal welfare, human biological samples, laboratory safety, or other research risks.

13. Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

All authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably influence, or appear to influence, the interpretation, evaluation, or publication of research.

Potential conflicts may include:

  • employment, consultancy, or institutional relationships;

  • research grants, sponsorships, or other financial support;

  • ownership interests, patents, or commercial relationships;

  • professional collaborations or competitive relationships; and

  • personal relationships that may compromise impartial evaluation.

Authors must disclose relevant funding sources and explain the role of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions, where applicable.

If no conflicts exist, authors should include an appropriate declaration, such as:

"The authors declare that they have no competing interests relevant to this article."

Editors and reviewers with significant conflicts of interest must recuse themselves from the relevant evaluation or decision-making process.

14. Data Availability and Research Transparency

REHAT encourages responsible data sharing, methodological transparency, and reproducible research.

Authors should provide sufficient information to allow readers to understand, evaluate, and, where appropriate, reproduce the study methods and analyses.

A Data Availability Statement is encouraged for all empirical research articles and may be required by the editorial team where appropriate.

Research data may be deposited in recognized repositories when permitted by ethical approvals, participant consent, applicable regulations, and institutional requirements.

Data sharing must not compromise patient confidentiality, participant privacy, intellectual property rights, or legitimate contractual restrictions.

Where data cannot be shared publicly, authors should explain the applicable restrictions and, where possible, identify an appropriate procedure for controlled access.

15. Peer Review Integrity and Confidentiality

REHAT applies a double-blind peer-review process for research manuscripts, as described in the journal's Peer Review Process policy.

Submitted manuscripts are initially assessed by the editorial team for scope, scholarly quality, originality, and ethical compliance.

Manuscripts meeting the initial criteria are normally assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant academic expertise.

Editors must make reasonable efforts to protect the identities of authors and reviewers during the double-blind review process.

Reviewer identities, unpublished manuscripts, confidential correspondence, and privileged research information must not be disclosed without appropriate authorization.

The journal does not tolerate fabricated reviewer identities, peer-review manipulation, inappropriate reviewer influence, or attempts to compromise editorial independence.

Editors must not guarantee acceptance before the completion of the required editorial evaluation and peer-review process.

16. Use of Artificial Intelligence and AI-Assisted Technologies

REHAT recognizes that artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies may support legitimate scholarly activities. However, their use must be transparent, responsible, and consistent with research integrity.

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation, research analysis, image production, or other activities materially affecting the submitted work.

Such disclosures should identify the tool and describe its role in the research or manuscript preparation, in an appropriate section of the article.

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for research integrity, authorship obligations, conflicts of interest, or publication agreements.

Authors remain fully accountable for all manuscript content, including text, data, analyses, images, references, and interpretations produced or modified with AI assistance.

AI-generated references, fabricated data, misleading images, and unverified scientific claims are prohibited.

Editors and reviewers must protect confidential manuscripts and must not upload unpublished submissions or confidential research information to external AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

The journal may request further explanation of AI-assisted activities when necessary to assess scientific accuracy, transparency, and ethical compliance.

17. Handling Allegations of Research and Publication Misconduct

REHAT takes allegations of research misconduct and publication malpractice seriously, whether they arise before or after publication.

Allegations may involve plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, unethical research, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation, undeclared conflicts of interest, or other serious breaches of publication ethics.

When a credible concern is raised, the editorial team will:

  1. Conduct a preliminary assessment of the allegation and supporting evidence.

  2. Determine whether additional documentation or expert assessment is required.

  3. Seek explanations from the relevant authors or individuals, where appropriate.

  4. Evaluate the available information objectively and confidentially.

  5. Consult relevant institutional authorities or appropriate ethical guidance when necessary.

  6. Decide on proportionate editorial or corrective action based on the evidence.

  7. Maintain appropriate records of the investigation and its outcome.

Possible actions include requests for clarification, manuscript revision, rejection, publication of a correction or expression of concern, retraction, or referral of serious allegations to the relevant research institution or authority.

The journal seeks to ensure fair procedures and appropriate opportunities for affected parties to respond.

Allegations submitted in good faith will be considered on their merits, including those raised by readers, researchers, institutions, or whistleblowers.

18. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

REHAT is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the published scientific record.

Where problems are identified after publication, the journal may take appropriate corrective measures consistent with COPE guidance.

Corrections

A correction may be published when an article contains an error that requires clarification or amendment but does not invalidate the overall findings or conclusions.

Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when substantial doubts arise regarding the reliability or ethical integrity of an article and the available evidence does not yet support a definitive conclusion.

Retractions

A published article may be retracted when its findings are unreliable because of serious errors, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research practices, redundant publication, or other serious violations affecting the validity or integrity of the work.

Retractions are intended to correct the scholarly record rather than punish authors.

Correction and retraction notices must clearly identify the relevant article, explain the reason for the action, and remain permanently accessible.

Retracted articles should remain identifiable as retracted scholarly records rather than being silently removed from the journal archive, except where exceptional legal, privacy, or safety considerations justify additional restrictions.

19. Complaints and Appeals

REHAT provides a mechanism for authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders to raise concerns regarding editorial decisions, peer-review procedures, publication ethics, or journal practices.

Complaints and appeals should be submitted through the official editorial contact channels identified on the journal website.

Appeals against editorial decisions should include a clear explanation and supporting evidence.

Complaints will be assessed fairly, confidentially, and without retaliation against individuals raising concerns in good faith.

Where a complaint concerns the conduct or decision of a particular editor, it should be reviewed by another appropriate editor or an independent party who has no relevant conflict of interest.

An appeal does not automatically result in reversal of an editorial decision.

20. Copyright, Licensing, and Intellectual Property

REHAT respects the intellectual property rights of authors, researchers, and copyright holders.

Authors retain copyright to their published work and grant the journal the right of first publication under the applicable publication agreement.

The journal's published articles are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0), in accordance with the journal's stated copyright policy.

Authors are responsible for obtaining any necessary permissions to reproduce third-party materials and for ensuring that the use of copyrighted content complies with applicable requirements.

Appropriate credit must be given to original sources, and reuse of journal content must comply with the applicable license terms.

21. Publisher Responsibilities and Editorial Independence

Lembaga Penelitian dan Pendidikan (LPP) Mandala, as the publisher of REHAT, is responsible for supporting responsible scholarly publishing and the long-term integrity of the journal.

The publisher is expected to:

  • respect and safeguard editorial independence;

  • provide appropriate administrative and publishing support;

  • promote transparent editorial and publication practices;

  • support investigations of serious ethical concerns;

  • assist with necessary corrections, retractions, and other corrective actions;

  • maintain the integrity and accessibility of the journal's published scholarly record; and

  • ensure that financial, institutional, or commercial considerations do not improperly influence editorial decisions.

Editorial decisions must remain grounded in scientific quality, ethical compliance, and the scholarly contribution of submitted manuscripts.

22. Post-Publication Discussion and Scholarly Accountability

REHAT recognizes the importance of continued scholarly evaluation after publication.

Readers and researchers may submit evidence-based comments, questions, or concerns regarding published articles through the journal's official editorial communication channels.

The editorial team may request responses from authors and take appropriate action when concerns reveal significant errors or ethical problems.

Constructive post-publication discussion is encouraged as part of maintaining scientific transparency, accountability, and the reliability of published research.

23. Commitment to Responsible Scholarly Publishing

REHAT is committed to promoting ethical scientific inquiry, responsible publication practices, methodological transparency, and trustworthy dissemination of health-related research.

All individuals involved in the journal's publication process are expected to uphold the principles outlined in this statement and cooperate in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

By submitting a manuscript to REHAT, authors acknowledge their responsibility to comply with the journal's publication ethics requirements and applicable research ethics standards.

The journal may review and update its ethical policies to reflect developments in international best practices and scholarly publishing standards.