Correction and Retraction Policy

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research (SJNR) · Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research (SJNR) is a peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal published by the Department of Nursing, Poltekkes Kemenkes Pontianak, Indonesia.

SJNR is committed to maintaining an accurate, reliable, transparent, and trustworthy scholarly record. The journal recognizes that errors, methodological concerns, ethical issues, or new information affecting the reliability of published research may become apparent after publication.

When such concerns arise, SJNR will evaluate the available evidence and take appropriate, proportionate, and transparent editorial action in accordance with internationally recognized principles of research integrity and publication ethics.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions are essential mechanisms for protecting the accuracy of scientific literature and informing readers about the current status and reliability of published research.

The primary purpose of these actions is to correct and safeguard the scholarly record, not to punish authors or institutions. A retraction does not necessarily imply deliberate research misconduct, as substantial errors may arise from honest mistakes.

As a journal dedicated to nursing and healthcare research, SJNR places particular importance on ensuring that published information used to inform clinical nursing practice, patient care, nursing education, healthcare management, and health policy is scientifically reliable and ethically obtained.

This policy is informed by the recommendations and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and relevant scholarly publishing standards concerning corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and the preservation of the scientific record.

All post-publication actions must be based on the seriousness of the concern, its effect on the reliability of the publication, the available supporting evidence, and the principles of fairness, editorial independence, confidentiality, and transparency.

1. Reporting an Error or Concern

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research encourages authors, readers, peer reviewers, researchers, healthcare professionals, research institutions, and other interested parties to report significant errors or concerns affecting articles published in the journal.

All reports will be considered fairly, objectively, and confidentially to the extent appropriate.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors have a continuing responsibility to maintain the accuracy and integrity of their published research.

When an author discovers a significant error, omission, inconsistency, or ethical concern in a published article, the author must promptly notify the SJNR editorial office.

Authors are expected to cooperate with editorial requests for clarification, correction, supporting documentation, or further investigation.

This responsibility extends to concerns identified after publication, including errors arising from research design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or the publication production process.

Where an identified error may materially affect clinical recommendations, nursing interventions, patient safety, or healthcare decision-making, authors should inform the editorial office without unnecessary delay.

Reporting by Readers and Other Parties

Readers, researchers, healthcare practitioners, reviewers, and other parties may report concerns about published articles.

Reports should be directed to the editorial office through the journal's official Contact Page.

The recommended subject line is:

Correction or Retraction Concern: [Article Title]

Required Information

A report should include the following information where available:

The complete title of the article and names of its authors.
The publication year, volume, issue, DOI, or permanent article URL.
A clear and specific description of the alleged error or concern.
Identification of the affected passages, tables, figures, statistical analyses, references, or other content.
Supporting evidence, references, documentation, or reproducible analyses where appropriate.
A proposed correction or explanation, if available.
Any relevant financial, professional, institutional, or personal competing interests of the person raising the concern.

Reports should distinguish between verified facts, reasonable interpretations, and allegations that require further investigation.

Confidential and Anonymous Reports

The journal may consider anonymous or confidential reports when they contain sufficiently specific, credible, and verifiable information.

Anonymous reporting does not automatically invalidate a concern. However, the absence of contact details may limit the journal's ability to obtain clarification or supporting evidence.

Confidentiality requests will be considered where reasonably justified, particularly when disclosure could expose an individual to legitimate professional, institutional, or personal risks.

The journal will not treat an allegation as proof of misconduct without appropriate assessment.

Reporting Period

There is no fixed expiry date for reporting a substantive error or integrity concern in an article published by SJNR.

Concerns may be examined regardless of the publication year when they may materially affect the accuracy, reliability, ethical integrity, or interpretation of the scholarly record.

2. Corrections

A correction is appropriate when an error or omission affects the accuracy, clarity, attribution, completeness, or interpretation of part of a published article, but the principal research findings and overall conclusions remain sufficiently reliable.

Corrections may be necessary for errors originating from the authors, editorial processing, or publication production.

Circumstances Requiring Correction

Examples include:

Incorrect numerical values, percentages, confidence intervals, or statistical results that do not invalidate the main conclusions.
Errors in tables, figures, illustrations, captions, or supplementary materials.
Incorrect labeling of variables, research groups, measurement instruments, or intervention outcomes.
Missing or inaccurate references that materially affect the article's scholarly context.
Omitted or incorrect statements concerning research funding or competing interests.
Errors in author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, or contributorship information.
Production or typesetting errors that materially affect scientific meaning.
Inaccuracies in the description of methods or procedures that can be clarified without undermining the reliability of the reported findings.

Corrections in Nursing and Healthcare Research

For nursing and healthcare publications, corrections may concern:

Incorrect reporting of patient characteristics or participant numbers.
Errors in clinical outcome measurements.
Inaccurate descriptions of nursing intervention procedures.
Incorrect values in clinical assessment tables.
Misreported statistical significance or effect estimates.
Errors in the description of validated nursing assessment instruments.
Incorrect identification of intervention and comparison groups.
Mistakes affecting recommendations for nursing practice that can be adequately corrected.

Where a correction concerns clinical findings, the editorial team must assess whether the error changes the interpretation of intervention effectiveness, patient outcomes, clinical significance, or safety recommendations.

A correction is appropriate only when the error can be adequately addressed without leaving the article's central findings materially unreliable.

Types of Corrections

Depending on the source and nature of the error, SJNR may publish:

Author Correction (Corrigendum)

A correction addressing an error attributable to the authors, including errors in reported findings, methodological descriptions, author information, or declarations.

Publisher Correction (Erratum)

A correction addressing an error introduced during editorial processing, copyediting, typesetting, formatting, or production.

The journal may use the general heading Correction when this provides a clearer and more consistent classification.

Requirements for a Correction Notice

A formal correction notice should:

Clearly identify the original published article.
State the nature and location of the error.
Provide the corrected information.
Explain whether and how the correction affects the findings, interpretation, or conclusions.
Identify the responsible issuing party where relevant.
Display an accurate publication date.
Be publicly accessible and linked to the original article.

Where the corrected article file is updated, the journal must ensure that the correction notice and version history remain discoverable.

Minor Editorial Errors

Minor typographical, formatting, or technical errors that do not affect scientific meaning, attribution, discoverability, or interpretation may be corrected without publishing a separate formal notice.

However, substantive changes to the scientific content, interpretation, research findings, or authorship record must not be made silently.

When there is uncertainty about whether a change is substantive, the editorial team should favor transparent documentation.

3. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern is a formal editorial notice that may be issued when significant questions about the reliability, validity, or ethical integrity of a published article remain unresolved and readers should be informed while further assessment is undertaken.

An expression of concern is distinct from a correction or retraction.

It does not establish that research misconduct has occurred or that the article is necessarily unreliable.

Circumstances Warranting an Expression of Concern

An expression of concern may be appropriate when:

Credible evidence raises substantial doubts about the reliability of reported findings, but the available information is insufficient for a definitive conclusion.
An investigation into suspected research misconduct is ongoing and is unlikely to be concluded promptly.
A relevant institution or research ethics committee is conducting an investigation whose findings may affect the publication.
The journal has identified serious inconsistencies in research data, statistical analyses, or ethical documentation requiring further assessment.
Available evidence suggests a potentially serious problem, but access to relevant research records is limited.
An investigation cannot be completed or there are significant concerns about the adequacy or impartiality of an external investigation.

Clinical and Patient Safety Considerations

In nursing and healthcare research, an expression of concern may be particularly important when uncertainty surrounds findings that could influence:

Clinical nursing interventions.
Patient safety or treatment decisions.
Prevention of healthcare-associated complications.
Infection prevention and control.
Medication administration or patient monitoring.
Nursing procedures involving vulnerable populations.
Healthcare quality improvement or clinical guidelines.

The editorial team should consider the potential consequences of continued reliance on the article while the concern remains unresolved.

Content of an Expression of Concern

An expression of concern must:

Clearly identify the article concerned.
Describe the nature of the unresolved issue.
Distinguish established facts from allegations or uncertainties.
Explain, where appropriate, whether an investigation is ongoing.
Avoid unsupported accusations or premature findings of misconduct.
State that further editorial action may follow when additional evidence becomes available.
Remain publicly accessible and linked to the affected publication.

Review and Resolution

The journal will review an expression of concern when significant new evidence or relevant investigation findings become available.

Possible outcomes include:

A correction addressing an identified error.
A retraction where the evidence establishes that the article is materially unreliable.
A public update explaining that the concern has been resolved.
An updated expression of concern where substantial uncertainty remains.

The editorial record must accurately preserve the history of the concern and its resolution.

An expression of concern should not remain unresolved indefinitely without reasonable editorial efforts to establish the status of the underlying issue.

4. Retractions

A retraction is a formal post-publication action undertaken when sufficiently established problems render an article's findings or conclusions unreliable or fundamentally compromise the integrity of its publication.

Retraction is intended to alert readers that the affected article should no longer be relied upon as a dependable source of scientific evidence.

Retractions may arise from honest errors, serious methodological problems, research misconduct, or publication ethics violations.

The purpose of retraction is to correct the scientific literature and protect its integrity, not to impose punishment on authors.

Grounds for Retraction

Retraction may be warranted in circumstances including:

Unreliable Research Findings

Fabrication or falsification of research data.
Major errors in data collection, processing, or statistical analysis.
Fundamental methodological problems invalidating the principal findings.
Serious inconsistencies between reported results and verifiable research records.
Substantial honest errors that cannot be adequately addressed through correction.

Plagiarism and Publication Misconduct

Substantial plagiarism or misappropriation of another individual's intellectual work.
Redundant or duplicate publication without appropriate disclosure or legitimate justification.
Unauthorized reuse of substantial copyrighted research materials.
Serious misrepresentation of authorship or research contributions where the publication's integrity cannot otherwise be restored.

Research Ethics Violations

Serious ethical breaches involving human participants.
Research conducted without required ethical approval or informed consent where applicable.
Serious violations of participant rights, privacy, confidentiality, or safety.
Use of research data obtained through fundamentally unethical procedures.
Material misrepresentation of ethics approval or participant protection arrangements.

Manipulation of the Publication Process

Fabricated reviewer identities.
Manipulated or fraudulent peer review.
Undisclosed relationships or coordinated conduct that fundamentally compromise the legitimacy of editorial evaluation.
Systematic manipulation of the submission, review, or publication process.

Other Significant Integrity Concerns

Misleading presentation or inappropriate manipulation of scientific images, figures, or datasets.
Serious undisclosed competing interests that materially undermine research credibility and cannot be adequately remedied through disclosure or correction.
Other substantial problems that prevent the article from remaining a trustworthy part of the scientific literature.

Retractions in Nursing and Clinical Research

SJNR recognizes that unreliable research in nursing and healthcare may have consequences extending beyond scholarly citation.

Retraction may require particular consideration when an article contains:

Fundamentally unreliable claims about the effectiveness of nursing interventions.
Invalid data concerning patient outcomes, morbidity, mortality, or treatment complications.
Serious errors affecting reported clinical risk or intervention safety.
Fabricated or falsified patient assessment data.
Substantial ethical violations involving vulnerable patients or research participants.
Misleading conclusions that could materially compromise evidence-based nursing practice.

The journal will assess whether the article's clinical conclusions remain scientifically supportable and whether correction alone can adequately protect readers.

Circumstances That Do Not Automatically Justify Retraction

Retraction is not automatically warranted merely because:

Another researcher disagrees with the article's findings.
A study produces negative, unexpected, or unpopular results.
A methodological limitation is subsequently identified.
A correctable error is discovered.
An authorship dispute arises without affecting the article's scientific reliability or publication integrity.
A funding or competing interest declaration requires clarification.
An article receives scientific criticism after publication.

Each case must be evaluated according to the evidence, the seriousness of the problem, and the availability of proportionate corrective measures.

Retraction Requests by Authors

Authors may request retraction of their published work when they identify significant problems that undermine its reliability or ethical acceptability.

A request should explain the reasons for retraction and provide relevant supporting information.

The journal will assess the request independently and determine whether retraction is justified.

An author's request does not automatically require retraction if the problem can be appropriately addressed through correction or another action.

Editorial Authority and Author Agreement

The final decision to retract an article rests with the authorized editor responsible for the journal's scholarly record, subject to appropriate independent handling of conflicts of interest.

The editorial office will ordinarily provide authors with an opportunity to respond to the concerns and to comment on the proposed notice.

However, unanimous author agreement is not required when sufficient evidence warrants retraction.

The journal may proceed with retraction even if one or more authors disagree, provided the decision follows fair assessment and established publication ethics procedures.

5. Assessment and Decision-Making

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research is committed to conducting post-publication assessments fairly, objectively, confidentially, and independently.

The editorial process must distinguish between honest error, scientific disagreement, unresolved integrity concerns, and substantiated research or publication misconduct.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon receiving a report, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated independent editor will assess whether the concern is sufficiently credible, specific, and relevant to warrant further examination.

The preliminary assessment may include:

Reviewing the published article and supporting materials.
Examining the specific passages, tables, figures, or analyses identified in the report.
Comparing relevant research publications or datasets.
Reviewing editorial records and submitted declarations.
Verifying available research ethics or publication documentation.
Consulting applicable publication ethics guidance.

The journal will determine whether the issue can be addressed directly or requires a more extensive investigation.

Communication With Authors

Where appropriate, the journal will contact the corresponding author and other relevant co-authors to explain the substantive concerns.

Authors will ordinarily be provided with:

A description of the issues requiring clarification.
Relevant supporting evidence that may appropriately be shared.
A reasonable opportunity to respond.
An opportunity to provide documentation or explanations relevant to the assessment.

The journal may request additional information concerning research methods, data analysis, participant protection, ethical approval, funding, or other issues directly relevant to the concern.

Failure to respond does not by itself establish misconduct.

However, the journal may make an editorial decision based on the available evidence when a serious concern remains unresolved and reasonable opportunities to respond have been provided.

Independent Expert Assessment

When necessary, the journal may consult independent experts with relevant scientific, clinical, methodological, statistical, or research ethics expertise.

Experts must disclose relevant competing interests and preserve the confidentiality of the material provided.

In nursing and healthcare research, independent assessment may be particularly appropriate when concerns relate to clinical interventions, patient safety, research methodology, outcome measurement, or statistical reliability.

Research Records and Confidentiality

SJNR may request access to relevant research records or supporting documentation when necessary to assess a credible concern.

Such requests must respect:

Patient privacy and confidentiality.
Informed consent and participant protection requirements.
Research ethics approvals.
Applicable data protection obligations.
Legitimate institutional and contractual restrictions.
Secure management of confidential research information.

Identifiable patient-level data must not be publicly disclosed merely to resolve a publication ethics concern.

Where direct access is not appropriate, the journal may request de-identified documentation, independent verification, or review by an authorized institution or research ethics body.

Institutional Investigations

Formal investigations into allegations of individual research misconduct may be referred to the authors' institutions, research ethics committees, funding bodies, or other responsible authorities.

The journal may request relevant investigation findings where appropriate.

Nevertheless, responsibility for maintaining the accuracy and integrity of SJNR's published content remains with its editorial management.

The journal may take proportionate editorial action based on sufficiently established evidence without waiting indefinitely for an external investigation.

Editorial Independence and Conflict of Interest

Any editor with a relevant competing interest must withdraw from the assessment and decision-making process.

Where an allegation involves an editor, the matter must be handled by another qualified editor without the relevant conflict.

Where the Editor-in-Chief is implicated, the responsible publishing institution, Poltekkes Kemenkes Pontianak, should arrange an appropriately independent editor or academic adviser.

No individual should be the sole decision-maker in a case involving their own conduct or a material personal interest.

Determination of Editorial Action

Following evaluation of the available evidence, the journal will determine the most appropriate action.

Possible decisions include:

Taking no formal action when the concern is unsupported or does not require amendment.
Requesting clarification or additional information.
Publishing a correction.
Publishing an expression of concern.
Retracting the article.
Referring relevant matters to an institution or another responsible authority.
Taking another proportionate editorial action consistent with publication ethics standards.

The decision must consider the reliability of the article, the effect on its conclusions, the available evidence, the potential implications for readers and patients, and the need to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

All substantive assessments, communications, and decisions must be appropriately documented.

6. Notices and Preservation of the Record

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research is committed to ensuring that post-publication changes are transparent, permanent, discoverable, and accurately reflected in the scholarly record.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions must be communicated through formal editorial notices rather than undocumented alterations.

Publication of Formal Notices

Formal notices must be:

Clearly labeled according to their purpose.
Publicly accessible without unnecessary access restrictions.
Assigned accurate publication dates.
Linked to the affected article.
Written in factual, neutral, and professional language.
Sufficiently detailed to explain the action without unnecessarily disclosing confidential information.

Notices must distinguish between confirmed findings, unresolved concerns, and allegations that have not been substantiated.

Minimum Information in a Retraction Notice

A retraction notice should include:

A clear heading identifying the notice as a retraction.
The complete title of the retracted article.
The original article's bibliographic information and DOI, where available.
The individual or editorial authority issuing the notice.
A factual explanation of the reasons for retraction.
An indication of whether the problems arose from honest error, misconduct, or unresolved causes, where this is established and appropriate to state.
Information about author agreement or disagreement, where known and relevant.
The accurate date of publication of the notice.
A persistent link to the original article.

The notice should explain why the article should no longer be relied upon.

Preservation of Retracted Articles

Retracted articles should ordinarily remain publicly accessible as part of the permanent scholarly record.

The original article must be clearly identified as retracted.

Where technically feasible, the retracted status should be displayed on:

The article landing page.
The article title or publication status.
The abstract and full-text presentation.
Available PDF versions.
Relevant publication metadata.

A prominent retraction marking or watermark should be applied to downloadable full-text versions when technically feasible.

The retraction notice and the original article must be linked in both directions.

Removal or concealment of a retracted article merely to avoid criticism is inconsistent with transparent scholarly publishing.

Corrections and Article Version History

When a corrected article file is made available, the journal must preserve a clear record of the substantive amendment.

This may include maintaining the original publication record, providing the corrected version, linking to the correction notice, and identifying relevant changes.

The journal must not silently replace substantive scientific findings or retrospectively alter publication information in a misleading manner.

Correction notices and updated files must preserve accurate publication histories.

DOI and Metadata Management

SJNR should ensure that material post-publication actions are accurately reflected in the journal's publishing platform and relevant DOI registration records.

Where supported by the journal's DOI registration arrangements and publishing infrastructure, formal correction, expression of concern, and retraction notices should receive their own persistent identifiers and appropriate metadata.

The journal should maintain appropriate relationships between the original article and the notice.

Relevant metadata may include:

The type of post-publication action.
The date of the notice.
The DOI or other identifier of the affected article.
The DOI or identifier of the notice, when assigned.
The relationship between the original publication and its subsequent update.
The current publication status.

When technically and operationally supported, the journal may use Crossref update metadata and Crossmark services to improve the discoverability of corrections and retractions.

Implementation of Crossmark must follow the requirements of the relevant registration service and must not be represented as active unless it has actually been implemented.

Indexing and Preservation Services

Where supported, the journal will provide updated records to relevant indexing, dissemination, archiving, and preservation services.

The journal should take reasonable steps to ensure that the retracted or corrected status of a publication is discoverable through appropriate bibliographic services.

Processing and display of updated information by external indexing services may depend on their own technical procedures.

Integrity of Publication Dates

The original publication date must remain accurate.

The date of a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other editorial notice must reflect the actual date on which that notice was made publicly available.

The journal must not backdate notices or alter publication dates to create a misleading appearance of earlier editorial action.

7. Exceptional Content Removal

Removal of published scholarly content is an exceptional measure and must be distinguished from correction or retraction.

Retraction ordinarily preserves the publication record and alerts readers that the findings should not be relied upon.

In contrast, content removal restricts access to some or all of the published material.

Circumstances That May Justify Removal

Exceptional removal may be considered when continued public availability creates a serious and demonstrable risk or is incompatible with a binding legal obligation.

Examples may include:

Publication of identifiable patient or research participant information without appropriate authorization.
Serious threats to the privacy, confidentiality, dignity, or safety of identifiable individuals.
Disclosure of confidential medical records or sensitive health information.
Content whose continued availability presents a credible and serious risk of harm that cannot be adequately mitigated through less restrictive measures.
A binding legal requirement to restrict or remove specific published material.

Patient Privacy and Clinical Confidentiality

SJNR places particular emphasis on protecting patients and research participants.

Published clinical case information, photographs, diagnostic images, medical records, or other potentially identifying materials must comply with applicable ethical and consent requirements.

When such materials are found to have been published improperly, the journal will assess whether redaction, replacement of the affected material, restriction of access, or another proportionate measure can adequately protect the individuals concerned.

Complete removal should not be the default response when a narrower intervention would sufficiently address the risk.

Principles Governing Removal

Any removal or restriction must:

Be justified by a sufficiently serious reason.
Be limited to the content or access necessary to address the concern.
Be documented through an appropriate editorial record.
Preserve bibliographic information where reasonably possible.
Be implemented in accordance with applicable legal, ethical, and institutional requirements.

Where feasible, the journal will retain a public bibliographic record with a notice explaining that some or all content has been removed.

The notice should provide an appropriate explanation without repeating confidential or harmful information.

Preservation of Editorial Accountability

Requests for removal will not be granted solely to:

Conceal scientific errors.
Avoid public criticism.
Prevent scrutiny of research misconduct.
Protect institutional reputation from legitimate scholarly examination.
Erase an unfavorable editorial finding.

Removal must never be used as a substitute for transparent correction or retraction when the underlying issue can appropriately be addressed through those mechanisms.

8. Appeals and Further Evidence

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research recognizes the right of authors and other directly affected parties to seek reconsideration of significant post-publication editorial decisions when there are legitimate grounds for doing so.

Appeals must be evaluated fairly, impartially, and consistently with the principles of editorial independence and publication ethics.

Grounds for Appeal

An appeal may be considered when it identifies:

Significant new evidence that was unavailable or not reasonably considered during the original assessment.
A material factual error affecting the editorial decision.
A substantial procedural irregularity.
A relevant conflict of interest that may have compromised impartial decision-making.
Important supporting information that was overlooked.
Other credible circumstances that may materially alter the assessment.

Mere disagreement with an unfavorable editorial decision is not, by itself, sufficient grounds for an appeal.

Submission of Appeals

Appeals should be submitted in writing through the journal's official Contact Page.

The recommended subject line is:

Appeal Concerning Correction or Retraction Decision: [Article Title]

An appeal should include:

The title and identifying information of the affected article.
Identification of the editorial decision being challenged.
A clear explanation of the grounds for reconsideration.
Relevant supporting evidence or documentation.
An explanation of why the new information may materially affect the original decision.

Independent Consideration

Where practicable, an appeal should be assessed by an editor or appropriately qualified independent adviser who was not directly responsible for the disputed decision.

The individual reviewing the appeal must not have a relevant competing interest.

Appeals involving the conduct or decisions of the Editor-in-Chief should be referred to the responsible publishing institution, Poltekkes Kemenkes Pontianak, for independent handling.

The journal may obtain additional scientific, methodological, ethical, or legal advice when appropriate.

Effect of an Appeal

Submitting an appeal does not automatically suspend a correction, expression of concern, or retraction notice.

Where a notice is necessary to inform readers about a significant concern affecting the reliability or safety of published research, it may remain in place while the appeal is assessed.

The journal will assess whether the available evidence warrants maintaining, revising, or supplementing the editorial action.

New Evidence After an Editorial Decision

SJNR remains open to reconsidering post-publication decisions when substantial new evidence becomes available.

If new information materially changes the assessment, the journal may publish an explanatory update.

Any revision or resolution of an existing notice must be transparent and appropriately linked to earlier notices.

The journal must not silently delete or alter an existing editorial notice to conceal the history of its decision-making.

Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

All parties involved in post-publication assessments and appeals must be treated respectfully and fairly.

Relevant communications, supporting documentation, and confidential research information must be shared only with authorized individuals who have a legitimate role in the assessment.

Individuals reporting concerns in good faith should be protected from inappropriate retaliation.

Equally, allegations must not be treated as established misconduct without adequate supporting evidence and fair evaluation.

Final Editorial Responsibility

The authorized editor is responsible for determining the appropriate post-publication action in accordance with the journal's editorial governance arrangements.

Decisions must be based on scientific evidence, the reliability of the published research, the seriousness of identified problems, and the need to preserve an accurate scholarly record.

SJNR will periodically review this policy to ensure its continued relevance to nursing research, biomedical publication ethics, scholarly publishing technology, and internationally recognized standards of research integrity.

The journal's overarching objective is to maintain public confidence in scientific knowledge and support the responsible dissemination of reliable evidence for nursing education, research, clinical practice, and healthcare improvement.

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research (SJNR)

Published by the Department of Nursing
Poltekkes Kemenkes Pontianak, Indonesia

P-ISSN: 2655-0024
E-ISSN: 2655-6731

Official Website:
https://ejournal.poltekkes-pontianak.ac.id/index.php/SJNR/index

Editorial Contact:
https://ejournal.poltekkes-pontianak.ac.id/index.php/SJNR/about/contact

Editorial Office Email:
ejournalpoltekkespnt@gmail.com

Indexed by:

View My Stats

Scientific Journal of Nursing Research

ISSN 2460-1853 (Print)
ISSN 2715-727X (Online)
Politeknik Kesehatan Kemenkes Pontianak Jurusan keperawatan
Jl. 28 Oktober, Siantan Hulu, Kecamatan Pontianak Utara, Kota Pontianak, Kalimantan Barat, Kalimantan Barat 78124
Telp : (0561) 737639
email: snjr.polkespon@gmail.com

Username
Password
Remember me

Abstracting and Indexing