Review guidelines

Peer review is a critical component in maintaining the high academic and practical standards of Prima sakti: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat (JPMP). We deeply appreciate the time and expertise our reviewers contribute to evaluating community service manuscripts in the fields of Nursing, Midwifery, and Public Health.

1. Invitation and Acceptance Process

When invited to review a manuscript, reviewers will receive an email containing a secure hyperlink. Clicking the appropriate link allows the reviewer to communicate their availability to the editorial team. If the invitation is accepted, the reviewer can log into the Open Journal Systems (OJS) to download the manuscript and access the structured review form.

2. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are expected to provide an objective and critical evaluation of the manuscript. Because JPMP focuses on community service, reviewers should specifically assess the following elements:

  • Relevance and Scope: Alignment with JPMP’s focus (e.g., Maternal/Child Health, Digitalization of Nursing, Health Promotion) and real-world health challenges.

  • Implementation Framework: The clarity, appropriateness, and ethical considerations of the methods used during the community intervention.

  • Impact and Outcomes: The tangible benefits, behavioral changes, or health improvements experienced by the target community.

  • Academic Quality: The originality of the problem-solving approach, strength of the literature review, and overall clarity of language and grammar.

3. Recommendations and Decisions

Each reviewer must provide an initial decision or recommendation regarding the manuscript. Please note that all comments must remain constructive and respectful. While reviewers provide the recommendation, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. Categories include:

  • Accept Submission: The manuscript is highly impactful and suitable for publication without further modifications; it can proceed directly to copyediting.

  • Revisions Required: Minor structural, grammatical, or contextual changes are necessary. These can be verified by the editorial team without a second peer-review round.

  • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript has potential but requires major revisions (e.g., deeper analysis of community impact, restructuring of methods). It will undergo another round of peer review.

  • Resubmit Elsewhere: The manuscript is scientifically sound but does not align with the specific community service focus of JPMP.

  • Decline Submission: The manuscript exhibits significant fundamental weaknesses, lacks clear community impact, or contains ethical violations, rendering it unsuitable for publication in JPMP.

4. Reviewer Ethics and Confidentiality

  • Confidentiality: All manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or discuss the contents with external parties.

  • Double-Blind Review: JPMP employs a double-blind review process. If a reviewer suspects they know the identity of the authors, they must notify the editor immediately.

  • Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must decline the invitation if they identify any competitive, collaborative, or financial conflicts of interest related to the submission.