POST-PUBLICATION DISCUSSION

Jurnal Ilmiah Kesehatan Masyarakat, abbreviated as SEHATMAS, welcomes scholarly discussion of its published articles that is based on evidence. Readers, researchers, and health practitioners can help to improve understanding of an article after it has been published. Contributions of the following kinds are valuable.

Kind of contribution	Examples
Questions about the method	The design of the study, the sampling, the instruments, the analysis, or the handling of the data.
Alternative interpretations	A different reading of the findings that is supported by evidence.
Replication results	Results of a replication in another community, health facility, or region.
Use of the findings	Comments on applying the findings in health practice, health programs, or policy.
Other substantive observations	Any other observation that helps readers to understand or to use the article.

Scholarly discussion has its own route. Errors that need a correction, suspected misconduct, and new research each follow a different procedure. Please use the table below to choose the right one.

Choose Your Route

What you want to do	Where to go
Comment on the method, the analysis, or the interpretation of a published article, or report a replication	This page
Point out an error in a published article that needs a correction	Correction and Retraction
Report suspected plagiarism, fabrication, or other misconduct	Allegations of Misconduct
Submit new research in response to a published article	Author Guidelines and Peer Review Process

1. Submitting a Scholarly Comment

Item	Requirement
How and to whom	Send the comment by email to the editorial office at jurnal.sehatmas@gmail.com.
Subject line	Scholarly Comment: [Article Title and DOI]
Language	Indonesian or English.
Identity	Sign the comment with your full name, your affiliation, and your email address.

1.1 What the Comment Must Contain

No.	Content
1	The title and the DOI of the article.
2	The specific issue that you raise.
3	The reasoning or the evidence that supports the comment.
4	Relevant references.
5	Any competing interests, as described in the Conflicts of Interest policy.

1.2 Guidelines for Writing the Comment

No.	Guideline
1	Keep the comment concise, so that it can be assessed with a clear focus. There is no fixed limit on length.
2	Criticize the work, and not the personal characteristics of the authors.
3	Separate clearly what has been shown to be an error, what remains an open question, and what is only a difference of interpretation.
4	Leave out confidential information and information that identifies participants, such as patients, respondents, or community members, unless it is truly necessary.

2. Editorial Consideration and Response of the Authors

Topic	How it is handled
Criteria	The editors assess the relevance and the clarity of the comment, the evidence for it, and its contribution to the understanding of the article.
Response of the authors	The authors of the article may be invited to respond. Their right to respond does not give them a say in whether a valid criticism is considered.
Independent advice	The editors may ask independent specialists for advice when it is needed.
No automatic publication	Disagreement with an article does not lead automatically to the publication of a comment.
Concerns raised elsewhere	A concern that has been raised on another scholarly platform may be examined once it has been brought to the attention of the journal.
Integrity concerns	A person who reports a credible concern about research integrity does not need a published comment before the concern is assessed. See Allegations of Misconduct.

3. Publication and Status of Comments

Topic	How it is handled
Labeling and linking	Comments and replies that are approved for publication are clearly labeled and linked to the article that they discuss.
Status	Correspondence that is assessed by the editors is not presented as having passed the standard peer review of the journal. New research that is submitted in response to an article follows the Peer Review Process.
No guarantees	The journal does not promise that a comment will be published, and it does not promise a fixed time for publication.

4. Scope of This Procedure

This procedure does not limit lawful public criticism of the articles of the journal, and it does not limit the reuse of articles that are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0) outside the journal. See the Licensing page.

Related Policies and Enquiries

Topic	Page
Suspected misconduct	Allegations of Misconduct
Errors that require a change to the published record	Correction and Retraction
General standards of conduct	Publication Ethics