Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The aim of this journal publication is to disseminate the conceptual thoughts or ideas and research results that have achieved in the area of medical laboratory sciences. This Journal particularly focuses on the main problems in the development of the sciences of medical laboratory areas. It covers the parasitology, bacteriology, virology, hematology, clinical chemistry, toxicology, food and drink chemistry, and any sciences that cover sciences of medical laboratory area

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The suitability of manuscripts for publication Medical Laboratory Technology Journal is judged by peer reviewers and editorial board. All the review process are conducted in double blind review. Editor in Chief handles all correspondence with the author and makes the final decision as to whether the paper is recommended for acceptance, rejection, or needs to be returned to the author for revision.

Editor in Chief and Editorial Board will evaluate the submitted papers on praqualification step for suitability of further review process. The manuscripts will be evaluated by two qualified peer reviewers selected by Editor in Chief. The peer reviewers should examine the manuscript and return it with their recommendation to the Editor in Chief as soon as possible, usually within 3 weeks. The Editor in Chief decide the acceptance or rejection of the paper.

Papers needing revision will be returned to the authors, and the author must return the revised manuscript to the Editor in Chief via OJS of Medical Laboratory Technology Journal. Editor in Chief sends the revised manuscript to Editorial Board to check whether the manuscript is revised as suggested by peer reviewers. Editorial Board could give recommendation to Editor in Chief that the manuscript should return to authors, accept, or reject within 1 weeks. Editor in Chief would send an acceptance letter announcing the publication issue attached with manuscript reprint to authors.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative


Budapest Open Access Initiative
An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.
For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies.

I. Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.


Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, they are within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Gu don: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists
Istv n R v: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Medical Laboratory Technology Journal is a journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles and case studies focused on Haematology, Microbiology, Parasitology, Chemistry, Immunology Serology, and other clinical laboratory as well as related topics (see:Focus and Scope) that has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication anywhere.

This following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (Jurusan Analis Kesehatan Poltekkes Kemenkes Banjarmasin). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Authors


  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.

  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.

  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

  5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

  9. Statement Letters: For every author in the Medical Laboratory Technology Journal is required to fill out a Statement Letter (Get here) that explains that the article has not been published in any journal, conference or seminar.


Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. 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. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

  2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor 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 also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. 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.

  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.

  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.

  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest.


Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.

  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work.

  4. 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.


Duties of the Publisher

  1. Handling of unethical publishing behaviour: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

  2. Access to journal content: The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.

 

Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees.


  • Article Submission: 0.00 (USD)

  • Fast-Track Review: 50.00 (USD)

  • Article Publication: 50.00 (USD)

  • Publication of articles from PoolText: 00.00 (USD)

 

Screening for Plagiarism

Medical Laboratory Technology Journal, as a respected international journal, wants to ensure that all authors are careful and comply with international standards for academic integrity, particularly on the issue of plagiarism.

Plagiarism occurs when an author takes ideas, information, or words from another source without proper credit to the source. Even when it occurs unintentionally, plagiarism is still a serious academic violation and unacceptable in international academic publications.

When the author learns specific information (a name, date, place, statistical number, or other detailed information) from a specific source, a citation is required. (This is only forgiven in cases of general knowledge, where the data is readily available in more than five sources or is common knowledge, e.g., the fact that Malaria caused by Plasmodium sp.)

When the author takes an idea from another author, a citation is required—even if the author then develops the idea further. This might be an idea about how to interpret the data, either what methodology to use or what conclusion to draw. It might be an idea about broad developments in a field or general information. Regardless of the idea, the authors should cite their sources. In cases where the author develops the idea further, it is still necessary to cite the original source of the idea, and then in a subsequent sentence, the author can explain her or his more developed idea.

When the author takes words from another author, a citation and quotation marks are required. Whenever four or more consecutive words are identical to a source that the author has read, the author must use quotation marks to denote the use of another author’s original words; just a citation is no longer enough.

Medical Laboratory Technology Journal takes academic integrity very seriously, and the editors reserve the right to withdraw acceptance from a paper found to violate any of the standards set out above. For further information, potential authors can contact the editorial office at leka.zns@gmail.com

Papers submitted to the Medical Laboratory Technology Journal will be screened and checked for plagiarism by using Similarity Check from Crossref, but an author should be checked it to before submitted.

 

Journal Scientific Statement

The articles published in Medical Laboratory Technology Journal are scientifically proved following the code of ethics of scientific publication. The code of ethics itself upholds three values of ethics in publications, namely, (1) Neutrality (free from conflicts of interest in public management), (2) Justice (giving the right of authorship to the beneficiary as the author), and (3) Honesty (free from duplication, fabrication, falsification and plagiarism (DF2P) in the publication. The articles published also follow the certain procedures or orders, such as double blind review and revision process that consistent with the journal’s regular review, to ensure that the quality is maintained properly.

 

Citation Analysis

>> SCOPUS
Citedness of Journal Articles in Scopus
Last update January 14, 2019
Medical Laboratory Technology Journal is cited by articles on SCOPUS database at least 3 times since published in June 2015.

Citation Detail:

1. Thuraidah A, Kartiko JJ, Ariani LF. (2015). 'Kulit Pisang Kepok (Musa paradisiaca L.) untuk Menurunkan Kadar Mangan Air Sumur'. Med Lab Technol J. (1) 1, pp. 19-26
Cited by:
Wardani, G.A., Wulandari, W.T., Khoirunnisa, R., Ningsih, W.R. (2018). 'Effect of time variation of banana (Musa acuminate) leaf waste on lead metal adsorption. AIP Conference Proceedings, (2049), 1, , pp. 1-4

2. Dwiyanti RD, Muhlisin A, Muntaha A. (2015). MRSA dan VRSA pada Paramedis RSUD Ratu Zalecha Martapura. Med Lab Technol J. 1 (1), pp. 27-33
Cited by:
Lutpiatina, L., Dwiyanti, R.D., Thuraidah, A. (2018). Inhibition of propolis and trigona spp’s honey towards methicilin-resistant staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant staphylococcus aureus. Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development. (9) 10, pp. 488-493

3. Dwiyanti, R.D., Lutpiatina, L. (2018) 'Lime Soap as Bacteria Reducer'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal 4(1), pp. 6-20
Cited by:
Dwiyanti, R.D., Andini, Y.T., Lutpiatina, L. (2019). 'Effect minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration of honey bee trigona spp on streptococcus pyogenes'.Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development
10(2), pp. 439-444


4. Lutpiatina, L., Agistni Eriana, N.N. (2018) 'Staphylococcus aureus and Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus From The Diabetic Ulcer'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal 4(1), pp. 30-34
Cited by:
Dwiyanti, R.D., Andini, Y.T., Lutpiatina, L. (2019). 'Effect minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration of honey bee trigona spp on streptococcus pyogenes'.Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development
10(2), pp. 439-444


5. Lutpiatina, L., Wahidah, N., Rakhmina Rifqoh, D. (2018) 'Sputum Quality Of The Anytime And Outset For Examination Acid-Resistance Bacilli'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal 4(1), pp. 26-29
Cited by:
Thuraidah, A., Naily, J.R., Hasanah, N.U., Lutpiatina, L. (2019). 'Correlation tuberculosis drugs treatment phase with SGPT/ bilirubin total level and correlation both of the enzymes from TB patients'.Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development
10(2), pp. 473-478


8. Yunus, R., Monganrosnani, R. (2017) 'Cemaran Bakteri Gram Negatif pada Jajanan Siomay di Kota Kendari'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal. (3) 1, pp. 11-16
Cited by:
Lutpiatina, L., Febriani, G.I., Kubarti, E., Dwiyanti, R.D. (2019). 'Spore-forming bacteria in honey'. Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development 10(2), pp. 450-455

9. Ni, M.N.W., Jirna, N (2017) 'Potensi Antifungi Tangkai Daun Jarak Pagar Terhadap Pertumbuhan Candida albicans'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal 3(2), pp. 63-67
Cited by:
Dwiyanti, R.D., Andini, Y.T., Lutpiatina, L. (2019). 'Effect minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration of honey bee trigona spp on streptococcus pyogenes'.Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development
10(2), pp. 439-444


10. Dwiyanti, R.D., Dediq, R., Thuraidah, A. (2017) 'Daya Bunuh Ekstrak Air Daun Salam (Syzygium polyanthum) terhadap Larva Aedes sp'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal 3(1), pp. 17-21
Cited by:
Dwiyanti, R.D., Andini, Y.T., Lutpiatina, L. (2019). 'Effect minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration of honey bee trigona spp on streptococcus pyogenes'.Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development
10(2), pp. 439-444


11. Margono, D.P.N.H., Suhartono, E., and Arwati, H. (2016) 'Effects of kelakai (Stenochlaena palustris (Burm.f) Bedd) extract against the level of interleukin-10 (IL-10) on mice'. Medical Laboratory Technology Journal. (1) 1, pp. 31-36
Cited by:
Chabib, L, et al (2018). 'Potential medicinal plants for improve the immune system from Borneo Island and the prospect to be developed as nanomedicine'. MATEC Web of Conferences. (154), pp. 1-6.


>> Google Scholar

>> Clarivate Analytics
Silahkan diisi