Post-Publication Discussions

1. Introduction

JUBIDA – Jurnal Kebidanan encourages constructive scholarly discussion of articles published in the journal. Post-publication discussion provides an opportunity for readers, researchers, midwifery practitioners, healthcare professionals, and authors to exchange evidence-based perspectives, clarify research findings, identify potential errors, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in midwifery and related health sciences.

The journal is committed to ensuring that scholarly discussions are conducted fairly, transparently, respectfully, and in accordance with publication ethics standards.

2. Scope of Discussion

JUBIDA welcomes scholarly comments and discussions concerning published articles, including:

Research objectives, theoretical frameworks, and scientific contributions.
Research design, methodology, data collection, and statistical analysis.
Interpretation of findings and their implications for midwifery practice and healthcare services.
Maternal and neonatal health, pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum care, reproductive health, family planning, and midwifery education.
Accuracy of references, data presentation, tables, figures, and reported results.
Relevant new evidence or alternative scientific interpretations that contribute to the understanding of the published research.

Comments should focus on the scientific content of the article and provide clear reasoning supported by relevant evidence or references.

3. Submission of Comments

Readers who wish to submit a comment or scholarly response concerning a published article should contact the JUBIDA editorial office through the journal's official communication channels.

Submissions should include:

The title and publication details of the article being discussed.
The DOI or URL of the original article, if available.
The name, institutional affiliation, and contact details of the contributor(s).
A clear explanation of the issue, question, or scholarly argument.
Relevant references or supporting evidence, where applicable.
A disclosure of any relevant conflicts of interest.

Comments must be original, relevant to the journal's scope, and written in a professional and respectful academic style. The editorial team may establish additional formatting and length requirements for submissions.

4. Editorial Assessment

All submitted comments are subject to editorial assessment. The editor will evaluate their relevance, clarity, scholarly significance, accuracy, originality, and compliance with publication ethics.

The editorial team may:

Accept a comment for publication.
Request revisions or additional supporting evidence.
Consult an independent expert when specialized scientific or methodological assessment is necessary.
Decline a comment that is irrelevant, repetitive, unsupported, defamatory, or inconsistent with the journal's editorial standards.

Editors who have a conflict of interest in the article or discussion must not participate in the relevant decision-making process. An independent editor may be appointed when necessary.

5. Right of Reply

When a submitted comment raises a substantive scholarly question or criticism regarding a published article, the original author(s) may be invited to submit a response.

The response should address the issues raised in the comment using relevant evidence and a professional academic tone. Authors are entitled to disagree with a comment, provided that their response is reasoned and supported by appropriate scholarly arguments.

The editorial team will assess both the comment and the response before deciding whether they are suitable for publication. Where appropriate, the journal may publish the comment and response together or link them to the original article.

If the original author(s) do not respond within the period specified by the editorial office, the journal may proceed with its assessment of the comment without a response.

6. Ethical Standards for Discussion

All contributors must adhere to the following principles:

Comments must address scientific arguments, methods, evidence, or findings rather than the personal characteristics of the authors.
Personal attacks, harassment, discriminatory statements, defamatory content, and unsupported accusations are not acceptable.
Contributors must respect confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, and applicable research ethics requirements.
Relevant conflicts of interest must be disclosed.
Comments must not be used for promotional purposes or to demand unnecessary citations.
Concerns regarding research misconduct must be submitted confidentially to the editorial office and handled under the journal's Research Misconduct Policy rather than presented as unsupported public allegations.

Differences in scientific interpretation are part of scholarly discourse and do not, by themselves, constitute research misconduct.

7. Errors and Research Integrity Concerns

If a post-publication discussion identifies a potentially significant error in a published article, the editorial team will assess the available evidence and determine whether further action is necessary.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction in accordance with its applicable editorial policies.

Allegations involving fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research practices, or other potential research misconduct will be handled separately under the journal's Allegation of Research Misconduct Policy.