Publication Ethics

Peer-reviewed journal Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) is one that PT Solusi Era Mediatama publishes. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of posting an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the editorial board, the peer reviewers, and the publisher.

The criteria or guidelines addressed to authors and reviewers by the Editorial Board are based on the principles of the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) from Elsevier.

If the work or research involves human subjects, human material, or human intervention, the authors must ensure that it is done in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and has been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. The authors must provide a statement detailing this, including the full name and institution of the research ethics review board, as well as the approval number. All participants must provide informed consent, which the author must keep.

Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics' Core Practices (COPE).

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in this journal 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 essential 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 society.

Duties of Publisher

PT Solusi Era Mediatama, as the publisher of Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing exceptionally seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or additional commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Duties of Editors

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews Editorial Board respects and promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion by accepting submissions only based on research and scholarly merit and integrity without considering race, ethnicity, nationality, citizenship, gender, religion, or financial means.

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.

Publication Decisions

The editor board 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.

Review of Manuscripts

The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated 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 indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The 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

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and through the editorial communications with the author, it may also help the author improve 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. Except with the editor's permission, you cannot show them to or discuss them with anyone else.

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 point out relevant published works that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument reports should be accompanied by the appropriate 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. The 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 actions and if they have used the works or words of others, they have appropriately cited or quoted them.

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 paper concurrently to more than one journal 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 article and have agreed to its submission for publication.

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.

Self-Citation Restriction Policy

Self-citation refers to when an author refers to the previous work written by him or her alone or in co-authorship and cites it. Self-citations are used to compare the current results of the research with earlier findings when continuing to study the same subject. It seems that the only reasonable solution for the issues of self-plagiarism, research integrity, and originality is to limit the number of self-citations.

This journal's self-citation restriction policy regulates that the self-citation level should not exceed 10% for an author, 20% for co-authors together, and 15% for Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR). If the reference checker (software) finds that this rule has been broken, then the manuscript will be automatically rejected by the desk editor without further review.

Screening for Plagiarism

All work in the manuscript should be free of any plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material. Authors are expected to explicitly cite others' work and ideas, even if the work or ideas are not quoted verbatim or paraphrased. This standard applies whether the previous work is published, unpublished, or electronically available. Failure to properly cite the work of others may constitute plagiarism. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) apply a minimum standard of similarity to the manuscript of under 20%. If the manuscript performs above 20%, the article should be revised or rejected. Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) apply a screening for plagiarism using Turnitin.

Correction and Retraction

Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) takes its responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of our content for all end users very seriously. Changes to articles after they have been published online may only be made under the circumstances outlined below. Comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety Reviews (COHASR) places great importance on the authority of articles after they have been published, and our policy is based on best practices in the academic publishing community.

An erratum is a statement by the authors of the original paper that briefly describes any correction(s) resulting from errors or omissions. Any effects on the conclusions of the paper should be noted. The corrected article is not removed from the online journal, but a notice of erratum is given. The erratum is made freely available to all readers and is linked to the corrected article.

A retraction is a notice that the paper should not be regarded as part of the scientific literature. Retractions are issued if there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable; this can be because of misconduct or honest error; if the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper referencing, permission, or justification; if the work is plagiarized; or if the work reports unethical research.

To protect the integrity of the record, the retracted article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of retraction is given, is made freely available to all readers, and is linked to the retracted article. Retractions can be published by the authors when they have discovered substantial scientific errors; in other cases, the editors or publisher may conclude that retraction is appropriate. In all cases, the retraction indicates the reason for the action and who is responsible for the decision. If a retraction is made without the unanimous agreement of the authors, that is also noted. In rare and extreme cases involving legal infringement, the publisher may redact or remove an article. Bibliographic information about the article will be retained to ensure the integrity of the scientific record.

A publisher's note notifies readers that an article has been corrected after publication. It is issued by the publisher and is used in cases where typographical or production errors (which are the fault of the publisher) affect the integrity of the article metadata (such as title, author list or byline) or will significantly impact the readers' ability to comprehend the article. The original article is removed and replaced with a corrected version. Publisher's Notes are freely available to all readers. Minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the metadata or a reader's ability to understand an article and that do not involve a scientific error or omission will be corrected at the discretion of the publisher.

In such a case, the original article is removed and replaced with a corrected version. The date the correction is made is noted on the corrected article. Authors should also be aware that an original article can only be removed and replaced with a corrected version less than one year after the original publication date. Corrections to an article that has a publication date that is older than one year will only be documented by a publisher's note.