Policies, Licensing and COI

2.1 Copyright Ownership

Authors retain the copyright of their work. Publication with ROOTS does not require the transfer of copyright to the publisher. Authors remain the legal copyright holders of their article after publication.

By retaining copyright, authors maintain ownership of their intellectual work and may reuse, share, and build upon their research, subject to the terms of the publication agreement and the applicable open access license.

Authors also retain their moral rights, including the right to be identified as the authors of the work and the right to object to any distortion, misrepresentation, or derogatory treatment of the work that could harm their reputation.

2.2 License to Publish

Upon acceptance of a manuscript, authors are required to sign a License to Publish Agreement. Through this agreement, authors grant ROOTS an exclusive license to publish the article and to identify itself as the original publisher of the Version of Record.

This license authorizes ROOTS to:

• publish and disseminate the article in digital and print formats;
• produce, host, and distribute the Version of Record;
• reproduce, display, communicate, and make the article publicly available worldwide;
• distribute and archive the article through indexing services, repositories, databases, and third-party platforms;
• register and manage persistent identifiers (including DOIs) and metadata associated with the article;
• ensure the integrity, discoverability, and long-term preservation of the scholarly record.

The exclusive license applies specifically to the publication, dissemination, and management of the Version of Record, while copyright remains with the authors.

2.3 Author Warranties and Responsibilities

As part of the License to Publish Agreement, authors confirm and warrant that:

• the submitted manuscript is original work created by the authors;
• the article has not been previously published, in whole or in part;
• the manuscript is not under consideration for publication elsewhere;
• all listed authors have made a substantial contribution to the work and have approved the final version of the manuscript;
• the submission complies with the journal's editorial and ethical policies;
• all necessary permissions have been obtained for the use of third-party copyrighted material (including figures, tables, images, datasets, or extensive text excerpts);
• the article does not infringe upon the copyright, intellectual property rights, privacy rights, or other rights of third parties.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and legality of the content of the published article.

2.4 Third-Party Material

If the article includes material that is not owned by the authors (such as figures, tables, images, datasets, or extended quotations), authors must ensure that appropriate permission has been obtained from the original copyright holder prior to publication.

Unless otherwise indicated in a credit line, third-party material included in the article will be considered to fall under the same Creative Commons license as the article itself.

Where different licensing terms apply, these will be clearly indicated within the article.

2.5 Version of Record

The Version of Record (VoR) is the definitive, final, and citable version of the article published by ROOTS after peer review, editorial revision, copyediting, typesetting, and final approval.

ROOTS is responsible for maintaining the integrity, accessibility, and permanence of the Version of Record.

All citations and reuse of the article should refer to the Version of Record and include appropriate bibliographic information and the persistent identifier (DOI).

2.6 Open Access Distribution License (CC BY 4.0)

All articles published by ROOTS are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

Under this license, any user may:

• copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format;
• remix, transform, and build upon the material;
• use the material for any purpose, including commercial purposes.

Provided that:

• appropriate attribution is given to the author(s), the article, the journal, and the publisher ROOTS;
• a link to the Creative Commons license is provided;
• any changes made are clearly indicated.

No additional legal or technological restrictions may be applied that would limit the rights granted by the license.

The Creative Commons license applies to the Version of Record as published by ROOTS.

2.7 Indemnification and Liability

Authors agree to indemnify and hold harmless the Publisher ROOTS, its editors, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claims, damages, losses, liabilities, costs, or expenses (including reasonable legal fees) arising from or related to:

• any breach of the author warranties described in this agreement;
• infringement of copyright, intellectual property rights, privacy rights, or other rights of third parties;
• unlawful, defamatory, fraudulent, or misleading content contained in the article;
• failure to obtain appropriate permissions for third-party material.

Authors acknowledge that they are solely responsible for the content of their work and for ensuring that all legal and ethical requirements have been satisfied prior to submission.

The Publisher shall not be held liable for any damages or claims arising from the content of articles authored by third parties.

Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts undergo a preliminary evaluation by the Editor in Chief to determine their suitability for the journal's scope, standards, and ethical requirements. Submissions that do not meet these criteria may be declined without external review.

Manuscripts considered appropriate for further evaluation are typically sent to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers assess the scientific quality, clarity, methodological robustness, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

Editorial Decision

The Editor in Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript. The Editor in Chief's decision is final.

Editors do not participate in the decision-making process for manuscripts:

• authored or co-authored by themselves;
• submitted by close collaborators or colleagues;
• or related to research areas in which they have a personal or professional interest.

In such cases, the manuscript is handled independently by another qualified member of the Editorial Board or an appointed Guest Editor. The submission follows the journal's standard peer review procedures, ensuring full independence from the conflicted editor and their research group.

Author Responsibilities

Authors must submit:

• A separate title page containing author names, affiliations, ORCID iDs (if available), and corresponding author contact details.
• A fully anonymized manuscript file, with no identifying information.

Submissions by the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor

Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor do not handle their own submissions. Such manuscripts are assigned to an independent Handling Editor with no conflicts and are reviewed by at least two independent reviewers. Final decisions are made by an independent Editorial Board member without conflicts. The journal monitors the proportion of Editor-authored content to safeguard integrity.

Submissions by Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board Members may submit manuscripts but receive no preferential treatment. They are excluded from editorial decisions on their papers and may not access review information beyond standard author communications. These submissions are handled by an independent Editor with no conflicts and reviewed by at least two external reviewers.

Submissions Involving Institutional or Personal Conflicts

If an author is affiliated with the same institution as an Editor, is a close collaborator, a family member, or any relationship may create perceived bias, the manuscript is assigned to a Handling Editor from a different institution with no conflict. The conflicted Editor has no involvement.

Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts before accepting. If a conflict emerges during review, reviewers must inform the Editorial Office and withdraw if necessary.

Authors' Appeals

Authors may appeal a rejection if they believe it involved misunderstanding, factual error, or procedural concerns. Appeals must be submitted in writing and include:

• point-by-point response to rejection reasons;
• justification and any new relevant data/evidence;
• confirmation all authors agree with the appeal.

Disagreement with reviewer opinion alone is insufficient. The Editor-in-Chief may uphold the decision or invite a revised resubmission. Appeal decisions are final. Manuscripts rejected for major methodological flaws or ethical concerns are not normally reconsidered.

Editorial Timelines

Review duration varies by reviewer availability, need for additional opinions, and revision extent. Revised manuscripts are typically re-assessed by original reviewers; multiple rounds may be requested. Authors should contact the Editorial Office only for significant delays (more than two months since the last formal communication).

Duties of Authors

Authors must ensure that:

• The manuscript represents original work.
• Data are accurate and not fabricated, falsified, or inappropriately manipulated.
• The work has not been published previously and is not under consideration elsewhere.
• All sources are appropriately cited.
• Authorship criteria are met in accordance with ICMJE recommendations.
• Ethical approval and informed consent have been obtained where required.

Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism and redundant publication, is unacceptable and may result in rejection or retraction.

Authorship

Authorship must be based on substantial intellectual contribution to the work. Roots in Science adheres to the authorship criteria established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

To qualify as an author, individuals must meet all of the following criteria:

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
2. Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions related to accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Individuals who contribute to the work but do not meet all authorship criteria (e.g., data collection, administrative support, technical assistance, language editing) should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section but not listed as authors.

Author Contributions

Authors may be required to provide a clear description of individual contributions at submission. All listed authors must approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission to Roots in Science.

Changes to Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office and must include:

• A detailed explanation of the reason for the change.
• Written confirmation from all listed authors (including the author being added or removed).

Changes to authorship after acceptance will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances and at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Corresponding Author

The corresponding author is responsible for:

• Managing all communication with the journal during submission and peer review.
• Ensuring that all authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript.
• Coordinating responses to reviewers.
• Managing post-publication correspondence.

The corresponding author must ensure the accuracy of author details and affiliations at the time of submission.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

• Treat manuscripts as confidential documents.
• Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations.
• Declare any conflicts of interest.
• Identify relevant published work not cited by the authors.
• Refrain from using unpublished material for personal advantage.

Duties of Editors

Editors are responsible for:

• Making fair and unbiased decisions based solely on academic merit.
• Ensuring confidentiality throughout the review process.
• Avoiding conflicts of interest.
• Taking appropriate action in cases of suspected misconduct.

Where misconduct is suspected, the journal will follow COPE flowcharts and procedures. This may include contacting authors' institutions and issuing corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions as appropriate.

Plagiarism Screening

All submissions may be screened with plagiarism detection software. Plagiarism includes copied text without citation, inadequate paraphrasing, self-plagiarism, and "salami slicing." Cases are assessed individually; confirmed misconduct may lead to rejection, retraction, and/or institutional notification. The journal may also conduct additional checks during revision and production.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Submissions must be original and not under review elsewhere. Related prior work must be disclosed in the cover letter. Conference abstracts do not preclude submission but must be declared. Translations may be considered only with full disclosure and permissions.

Image Integrity

Images must reflect original data. Minimal whole-image adjustments may be acceptable; selective alteration, undisclosed splicing, and misleading enhancement are prohibited. Authors must retain original data and provide it upon request. Suspected manipulation may lead to rejection or retraction.

Reuse of Published Material

Authors must obtain written permission for reuse of copyrighted tables/figures/text and provide documentation at submission.

Citation Manipulation

Citations must be scholarly justified. Citation manipulation is unethical. Self-citations should generally not exceed ~15% of references, though evaluated case by case.

Human Subjects

All human research requires IRB/Ethics Committee approval (or formal exemption). Manuscripts must state the approving body, approval number (if applicable), and date. Editors may request documentation. Age and sex/gender must be reported.

Informed Consent

Written informed consent is required unless a justified exemption applies. Survey/questionnaire studies require ethics approval/exemption; participants must be informed about purpose, voluntariness, confidentiality, and data use. Implicit consent may be acceptable only in limited, low-risk, anonymous, voluntary quality improvement/administrative contexts.

Privacy and Identifiable Information

Identifiable information must not be published unless scientifically essential and written consent for publication is obtained. Anonymization must not distort meaning; eye-bars/blurring alone are insufficient without consent. Fully anonymized diagnostic images generally do not require consent. GDPR compliance is required.

Animal Studies

Animal research must follow national regulations and ARRIVE guidelines. Report species/strain, sex, age, weight, source/vendor, and approval details. Single-sex use requires justification.

Cell Lines

Report cell line origin, authentication method, and source/reference. Human-derived newly established lines require confirmation of consent.

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials must be prospectively registered in a WHO ICTRP-compliant registry. Registration number and registry name must appear in the Abstract and Cover Letter. Retrospective registration does not meet ICMJE requirements. Secondary analyses must reference the primary registration.

Authors

At the time of submission, all authors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could be considered relevant to the submitted work. Disclosures must include, where applicable:

• All sources of funding related to the research;
• Financial relationships (e.g., employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership, patents, grants);
• Non-financial interests (e.g., professional affiliations, advisory roles, advocacy positions);
• Consultancies or financial relationships within the previous 12 months;
• The role of sponsors in study design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of results, or manuscript preparation.

If no conflicts exist, authors must explicitly state:

"The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest."

Failure to disclose relevant conflicts may result in corrective action, including publication of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Industry-Sponsored Research

For industry-funded studies, authors must clearly disclose:

• The identity of the funding organization(s);
• Whether the sponsor had any role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or manuscript drafting;
• Whether investigators had full and independent access to all study data;
• Whether the sponsor reviewed or approved the manuscript prior to submission.

Transparency in industry-sponsored research is essential to safeguard scientific credibility and reader trust.

Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting an invitation to review a manuscript. Conflicts may include:

• Recent collaboration with the authors;
• Institutional affiliation;
• Personal or professional relationships;
• Financial interests related to the manuscript topic;
• Academic competition.

Reviewers who believe their objectivity may be compromised must decline the review.

Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents and must not use unpublished data or ideas for personal, professional, or financial advantage.

Editors and Editorial Office

Editors and members of the Editorial Office must recuse themselves from handling or making decisions on manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. Conflicts may arise from:

• Personal or professional relationships with the authors;
• Institutional affiliations;
• Financial interests;
• Academic competition.

In such cases, the manuscript will be reassigned to an independent editor with no relevant conflict. The same policy applies to Guest Editors of Special Issues.

Roots in Science maintains strict editorial independence. Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scientific merit, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's scope, and are not influenced by commercial, institutional, or financial interests.

Proposal and Approval

Special Issues may be proposed by members of the Editorial Board or external scholars with recognized expertise in the relevant field. All proposals are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief and must include:

• A clear description of the theme and rationale;
• Proposed Guest Editor(s);
• A list of potential contributors;
• A proposed timeline.

Final approval of any Special Issue rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.

Role of Guest Editors

Guest Editors are responsible for:

• Promoting the Special Issue;
• Recommending suitable reviewers;
• Providing editorial input on submitted manuscripts.

However:

• Guest Editors do not have final decision-making authority.
• The Editor-in-Chief retains full responsibility for editorial decisions.
• All final acceptance or rejection decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief.

Guest Editors must declare any conflicts of interest and are excluded from handling manuscripts where conflicts exist.

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to a Special Issue undergo the same double-blind peer review process as regular submissions. Special Issue manuscripts:

• Must meet the same scientific and ethical standards;
• Are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers;
• Are subject to the journal's editorial policies and publication ethics guidelines.

There is no preferential or expedited review process for Special Issue articles.

Editorial Independence

The scientific integrity of the journal is paramount. Special Issues:

• Must adhere to the journal's policies on authorship, conflicts of interest, data transparency, and ethical approval;
• Are subject to the same production, copyediting, and publication standards as regular issues.

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scientific merit and are independent of any institutional, commercial, or personal interests.

Advertising Policy

Roots in Science and its Publisher maintain a strict separation between editorial content and commercial activity in order to safeguard scientific integrity and editorial independence. All advertising, sponsorship, or promotional material is subject to prior review and formal approval by the Publisher. The Publisher reserves the unrestricted right to decline any advertising proposal, sponsorship request, or commercial collaboration without the obligation to provide justification.

Advertising content:

• Is clearly distinguishable from editorial material;
• Is displayed in a manner that does not interfere with the scientific content of the journal;
• Does not influence editorial decisions, peer review outcomes, or manuscript evaluation processes.

Sponsors, advertisers, and commercial partners have:

• No involvement in the peer review process;
• No access to confidential editorial information;
• No influence over acceptance, rejection, revision decisions, or publication scheduling.

Roots in Science accepts only advertising that is institutional, educational, or professionally relevant to the journal's scope (e.g., academic initiatives, scientific meetings, institutional programs). Direct product-specific promotion, commercial product endorsements, or promotional advertising linked to individual clinical products are not accepted.

All sponsorship agreements must explicitly acknowledge the journal's full editorial autonomy and independence.

Commercial Reprints

Printed or digital reprints of published articles may be purchased for educational, academic, or informational purposes. The purchase or distribution of reprints:

• Has no impact on editorial decisions;
• Does not affect peer review outcomes;
• Does not influence publication priority or timing;
• Is managed independently from the editorial process.

Reprint agreements are handled exclusively by the Publisher and are administratively separate from manuscript evaluation and production workflows.

Roots in Science's advertising and reprint policies are designed to ensure transparency, prevent commercial interference, and preserve the credibility of the scientific record.