Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health is a forum for scientific publication of the results of studies on the application of science and technology to stakeholders in the fields of environmentally friendly agriculture, food, nutrition and public health which includes:

CheckedAgricultural Cultivation
CheckedFood Technology
CheckedAnimal Husbandry 
CheckedAgricultural Extension and Communication
CheckedAgricultural Socio-Economic
CheckedNutrition
CheckedPublic Health
CheckedMidwifery

 

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Editorial

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The articles submitted to AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health will be processed through a formatting review by the editor and independently reviewed by two peer reviewers. The review process applies Double Blind method. Decisions from reviewers are a top priority for editors to make decisions. The time required by reviewers to complete a round review process is three weeks. Generally, prospective reviewers will be selected based on their reputation in the suitability of their expertise. The decision for publication, amendment, or rejection is based on their reports/recommendation. After being reviewed, there will be four kinds of editor decision based on reviewers’ recommendation:

Articles AcceptSubmissions will be accepted without revision.

Revision Required Submissions will be accepted after minor changes have been made. Articles sent back to the author for revision must be returned to the editor without delay. Revised articles returned more than 20 days will be considered as new submissions. Revised articles can be submitted to the editorial via the account on OJS or the official AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health.

Resubmit for re-review : The application must be reworked, but with significant changes, after which a second round of review is conducted.

Rejected : The submission will not be published in the journal.


The article published in AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health was previously reviewed by two reviewers prior to publication. The decision to accept the article to be published is within the authority of the editor in chief based on the recommendation of the reviewer. Articles that have been declared accepted and have been layout will be published in In Progress number in the next number before the regular number is published according to the schedule so that it can be indexed and tested immediately.

 

 

Publication Frequency

AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health is published 2 (two) times every year in April and October.

 

 

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...

 

 

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health (ISSN 2722-0656 [Print] and 2722-0648 [Online]) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Research and Development Center for Food, Nutrition and Public Health (P4GKM) LPPM Universitas Sebelas Maret. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Research and Development Center for Food, Nutrition and Public Health (P4GKM) LPPM Universitas Sebelas Maret as publisher of AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Research and Development Center for Food, Nutrition and Public Health (P4GKM) LPPM Universitas Sebelas Maret and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

 

Publication Decisions

The editor of the AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health journal is 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.

 

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Duties of Reviewers

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.

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.

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.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

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.

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.

 

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

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 behavior and are unacceptable.

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.

Originality and Plagiarism

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.

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 behavior and is unacceptable.

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.

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.

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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another 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.

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. Please see Competing Interest Guidelines.

 

Human Subjects Research

The AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health requires that research involving human subjects (e.g., surveys, sensory panels, or other participation) complies with all appropriate laws, regulations, and policies (e.g., the Declaration of Helsinki) governing the use of human subjects in research. The authors should state explicitly that institutional review board (IRB) or equivalent approval was obtained before commencement of the study, including the name of the IRB that granted approval. The human object identity as respondent (information source) is securely protected according to the local authority policy.

 

Animal Experiments

The AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health requires that all research animal activity to be performed in compliance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The authors should state explicitly that institutional animal care and use (IACUC) or equivalent approval was obtained before commencement of the study. Authors should make it clear that experiments were conducted in a manner that avoided unnecessary discomfort to the animals by the use of proper management and laboratory techniques. The use of 5 freedom (5F) and 3R principles must be take into account in the experimental design. Experiments should be conducted in accordance with the principles and specific guidelines presented in Guidelines for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching, 3rd ed. (available from FASS Inc., 1800 S. Oak St., Suite 100, Champaign, IL 61820; https:// www.adsa.org/Publications/FASS2010AgGuide.aspx). Methods of killing experimental animals must be described in the text. When describing surgical procedures, the type and dosage of the anesthetic agent must be specified.

 

 

Plagiarism

Authors should submit only original work that is not plagiarized and not has been published or being considered elsewhere. Turnitin software will be used by the editorial team to check for similarities of a submitted manuscript with existing literature. If an article has over 25% of the total plagiarism, its will be rejected.

 

 

Retraction

The papers published in AgriHealth: Journal of Agri-food, Nutrition and Public Health will be considered to retract in the publication if:

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
  2. It constitutes plagiarism
  3. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
  4. It contains material or data without authorisation for use
  5. Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)
  6. It reports unethical research
  7. It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
  8. The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4