Review Guidelines

Peer Review Model

Interdental Jurnal Kedokteran Gigi (IJKG) applies a double-blind peer review process, in which both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed. Peer review supports editorial decision-making and ensures the scientific quality, integrity, and relevance of published articles.

 

Role and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely assessments of submitted manuscripts within their field of expertise. Reviews should evaluate scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Reviewers are responsible for:

  • Assessing the novelty, significance, and contribution of the manuscript
  • Evaluating methodological soundness and data integrity
  • Providing clear, evidence-based feedback to improve manuscript quality
  • Maintaining confidentiality throughout the review process

 

Before Accepting a Review Invitation

Subject Expertise
Reviewers should accept review invitations only for manuscripts that fall within their area of expertise. If not, reviewers must promptly inform the editor and may suggest alternative qualified reviewers.

Availability and Timeliness
Reviews should be completed within four (4) weeks. If a delay is unavoidable, reviewers must notify the editor as early as possible.

Competing Interests
Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest prior to reviewing. Transparency is required even when conflicts do not preclude participation.

 

Evaluation Criteria

Title and Abstract

  • Accurately reflect the content, objectives, and key findings
  • Clearly communicate the scope and contribution of the study

Introduction

  • Clearly defines the research problem and objectives
  • Demonstrates awareness of current literature
  • Justifies the rationale and relevance of the study

Originality and Journal Scope

  • Demonstrates sufficient originality and innovation
  • Fits the aims and scope of the journal
  • Shows clear contribution to existing knowledge

Materials and Methods

  • Study design and methodology are appropriate and reproducible
  • Data collection procedures are clearly described
  • Ethical approval and informed consent are stated where applicable
  • Sampling strategy, instruments, and materials are adequately detailed
  • Novel methods are sufficiently explained and justified

Results

  • Presented clearly, logically, and objectively
  • Appropriate statistical analyses are applied
  • Data are reported without interpretation in this section

Discussion and Conclusions

  • Interpretations are supported by the results
  • Findings are discussed in relation to relevant previous studies
  • Study limitations are acknowledged
  • Conclusions highlight scientific implications and future research directions

Tables and Figures

  • Clear, relevant, and appropriately labeled
  • Consistent with the content and data presented in the manuscript

 

Language and Presentation

  • Manuscripts must be written in English or Bahasa Indonesia
  • Language should be clear, coherent, and academically appropriate
  • Manuscripts should be well-structured, focused, and readable

 

Ethical Considerations

  • Confidential information obtained during peer review must not be used for personal advantage
  • Suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, or ethical misconduct must be reported to the editor

 

Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewer recommendations must be supported by clear and constructive justification. Reviewers should select one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Moderate Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject