Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The publication ethics and malpractice statement of PCJN: Pharmaceutical and Clinical Journal of Nusantara is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. All parties involved in the publication process—including authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher—are expected to adhere to the highest standards of ethical publishing.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors should present an accurate and objective account of the research performed, along with a clear discussion of its significance. The results should be reported honestly without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to allow other researchers to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors must also ensure that their manuscripts comply with the journal’s Author Guidelines.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. If authors have used the work or words of others, appropriate citations and references must be provided. Manuscripts must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal unless agreed upon by the editors.

Relevant prior publications, including the authors’ own previously published work, should be properly cited. Direct quotations from other sources must appear in quotation marks and be accompanied by appropriate citations.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Publishing the same research in more than one journal without proper acknowledgment constitutes unethical publishing behavior.

If multiple publications arise from the same research project, the relationship between the publications must be clearly indicated and the primary publication must be properly referenced.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must acknowledge all sources of data and information used in the research. Proper credit should always be given to the work of others, and relevant literature should be appropriately cited.

Authorship of the Manuscript

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

All individuals who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors, while those who contributed in a more limited way (e.g., technical assistance or editorial support) should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.

The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could potentially influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. Sources of financial support for the research must also be clearly stated.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editorial team to correct or retract the article if necessary.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the research involves hazardous chemicals, procedures, or equipment, these must be clearly identified in the manuscript. Research involving human participants or animals must comply with relevant ethical standards and regulations.

Duties of Reviewers

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Information regarding submitted manuscripts must not be disclosed or discussed with others without authorization from the editor.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should ensure that authors have properly cited relevant prior work. Reviewers should identify important published research that has not been cited by the authors.

If reviewers become aware of any substantial similarity between the submitted manuscript and another published work, they should notify the editor immediately.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and constructively. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support their evaluations with appropriate arguments.

The purpose of peer review is to improve the quality of the manuscript, therefore reviewers should provide constructive feedback that helps authors strengthen their research and presentation.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, institutions, or organizations connected to the work.

Information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.

Promptness

Reviewers should respond to review invitations promptly and complete their reviews within the agreed timeframe. If a reviewer feels unable to review the manuscript or cannot complete the review within the specified time, the reviewer should inform the editor immediately so that an alternative reviewer can be assigned.