Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Focus and Scope

The Indonesian Journal of Computational Biology (IJCB) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal dedicated to disseminating high-quality research utilizing computational, statistical, and mathematical methods to address biological challenges. The journal serves as a bridge between informatics and experimental biology, with a particular focus on studies investigating Indonesia’s extensive biodiversity.

The scope of IJCB includes, but is not limited to, the following areas:

1. Computational Drug Discovery & Pharmacology

  • In Silico Screening: Molecular docking, molecular dynamics simulations, and virtual screening of natural or synthetic compounds.
  • Pharmacoinformatics: ADMET (Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Excretion, and Toxicity) profiling and Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) studies.
  • Network Pharmacology: Analyzing the complex interactions between multi-target compounds and disease-related biological networks.

2. Bioinformatics & Sequence Analysis

  • Genomics & Proteomics: Comparative genomics, gene prediction, protein structure prediction, and functional annotation.
  • Phylogenetics: Evolutionary studies and biodiversity analysis using molecular data, especially regarding Indonesian endemic species.
  • Transcriptomics: Computational analysis of gene expression patterns and RNA sequencing data.

3. Systems Biology & Mathematical Modeling

  • Biological Networks: Modeling of metabolic pathways, signal transduction, and regulatory networks.
  • Biostatistics: Development and application of statistical methods for biological data interpretation and clinical research.
  • Synthetic Biology: Computational design and simulation of biological systems and components.

4. Structural Biology & Molecular Modeling

  • Analysis of protein-ligand and protein-protein interactions.
  • Investigation of molecular mechanisms of action for therapeutic agents.
  • Computational biophysics and structural bioinformatics.

5. Biodiversity Informatics

  • Development of databases and tools for documenting and analyzing Indonesian biological resources.
  • Data mining and machine learning applications in biodiversity and conservation biology.

Article Types Accepted:

  • Original Research Articles: Full reports of data-driven computational research.
  • Review Articles: Comprehensive summaries of current trends in computational biology and bioinformatics.
  • Short Communications: Brief reports on significant new findings or methods.
  • Protocols/Methodologies: Step-by-step computational workflows or new software tool descriptions (as seen in your "Protocols" section in recent issues).

 

 

Section Policies

Article

Editors
  • Editor Pelaksana
  • Muchtaridi, Ph.D.
  • Muhammad Yusuf
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review

Editors
  • Editor Pelaksana
  • Muchtaridi, Ph.D.
  • Muhammad Yusuf
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Protocols

Editors
  • Editor Pelaksana
  • Muchtaridi, Ph.D.
  • Muhammad Yusuf
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

For the Indonesian Journal of Computational Biology (IJCB), the peer review policy is designed to ensure rigorous scientific standards while maintaining a fair and objective evaluation. Based on the journal's standards and its affiliation with Universitas Padjadjaran, the following methods and processes are employed:

1. Peer Review Policy

  • Method: Double-Blind Peer Review. Neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identities. This minimizes bias based on the author's reputation, institution, or gender.

  • Standard: IJCB follows the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

  • Reviewer Requirement: Every manuscript is evaluated by at least two (2) independent reviewers who are experts in computational biology, bioinformatics, or related mathematical fields.

  • Integrity Check: All submissions undergo an initial plagiarism screening (typically via Turnitin) before being sent for review.

2. The Peer Review Process

The workflow from submission to publication generally follows these steps:

Stage 1: Initial Editorial Desk Review

The Editorial Office first checks the manuscript for:

  • Alignment with the Focus and Scope of the journal.

  • Adherence to the Author Guidelines (formatting, template, references).

  • Plagiarism threshold (usually must be below 20-25%).

  • Outcome: If it fails these criteria, the paper is rejected at the "desk" or sent back for technical corrections.

Stage 2: Peer Review Assignment

  • The Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor invites potential reviewers based on their expertise.

  • Reviewers have a set period (often 2–4 weeks) to accept or decline the invitation.

Stage 3: Evaluation by Reviewers

Reviewers assess the paper based on several critical pillars:

  1. Novelty: Does it provide a new contribution to computational biology?

  2. Methodology: Are the mathematical models, algorithms, or docking parameters scientifically sound and reproducible?

  3. Results & Discussion: Are the conclusions supported by the data?

  4. References: Are the citations current and relevant?

Stage 4: Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewer reports, the Editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept Submission: The paper is ready for publication (rare for a first round).

  • Revisions Required (Minor): The author must make small changes; usually, the Editor verifies these without a second round of review.

  • Resubmit for Review (Major): Substantial changes are needed, and the paper will be sent back to the reviewers for a second look.

  • Decline Submission: The paper is rejected due to significant flaws or lack of novelty.

Stage 5: Final Production

Once accepted, the manuscript moves to copyediting, layout (typesetting), and finally, publication in one of the three annual issues.

3. Reviewer Checklist (Internal Reference)

If you are developing these guidelines for your website, reviewers are typically asked to answer:

  • Does the title clearly reflect the content?

  • Is the abstract a concise summary of the study?

  • Is the computational method described in enough detail for another researcher to repeat it?

  • Are the figures and tables clear and necessary?