Handling the Peer-Review Process: We are committed to bridge all components of peer-review process for delivery of quality publications and benefiting researchers. Our all advertisements, language service, special service, or other commercial interests shall not affect the decision of the editors and reviewers.

Article Withdrawal and Corrections to the Record: The published articles should be considered for withdrawal if proven to be plagiarised, presenting fake, duplicate or fraudulent data, or showing clear evidences of infringements of ethical codes. Such articles (html, pdf, xml, epub, zip) will be replaced by the content stating the withdrawal of the manuscripts. Minor errors such as typos, textual changes, or clearer statements on the existing contents will be published as corrections.

Integrity and Quality of Services: We will ensure that all contents are confidential before publication, meeting standard of archiving and abstracting and timely publication of the accepted manuscripts.

Publication Ethics Statement: Publication of scientific contents is meticulous, methodical and comprehensive processes that involve good ethical and managerial practices. The Grassroots Institute and respective journals take the responsibility to ensure that a rigorous peer-review has been performed, and strict ethical policies and standards are observed for presented manuscripts. In cases of plagiarism, fraudulent data, inappropriate authorship credit, and similar, respective journals handle these misconducts very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero-tolerance policy. To effectively maintain high publication standards, The Grassroots Institute strives to work with editors, authors, peer-reviewers and copy editors on one-to-one bases. To ensure that submitted contents are original and are not duplicated from previous publications, we use Turnitin, iThenticate or Grammarly on every published article. The publication ethics, attributed to all journals of The Grassroots Institute, are based on the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct. Our all journals follow COPE standards for publication ethics.


Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images, or data from another source, even from your own publications, without giving any credit to the original source. Reuse of text that is copied from another source must be between quotes and the original source must be cited. If a study's design or the manuscript's structure or language has been inspired by previous works, these works must be explicitly cited. If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may publish a correction or retract the paper.

Irregular manipulation in images includes: 1) introduction, enhancement, moving, or removing features from the original image; 2) grouping of images that should obviously be presented separately (e.g., from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels); or 3) modifying the contrast, brightness or color balance to obscure, eliminate or enhance some information. If irregular image manipulation is identified and confirmed during the peer review process, we may reject the manuscript.

Grassroots Institute is committed to maintaining high standards through a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies. Any infringements of professional ethical codes, such as plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, bogus claims of authorship, should be taken very seriously.

An Initial Plagiarism Check is carried out for every manuscript submitted to the journals of The Grassroots Institute. The Grassroots Institute is a member of CrossCheck (CrossRef) and has added all its papers to the CrossCheck database. In this way, also other publishers can compare their manuscripts with The Grassroots Institute’ papers. CrossCheck is used through the web-based iThenticate system by uploading a document and running a similarity check against the CrossCheck database and the Internet. The check provides a "Similarity Index" which is the percentage of the manuscript matching other sources. iThenticate does not determine whether a manuscript contains plagiarism. Therefore, manuscripts with a high "Similarity Index" are examined if the other matching sources have been properly cited. We may also use Turnitin or Grammarly.


As described above, our journals abide to the COPE’s Code of Conduct. Our all the journals follow the COPE Guidelines and Core Practices as prescribed by COPE. Such core practices pertain to the following 10 contexts:


While publishing our journals, The Grassroots Institute is committed to follow the transparency and best practices as set by the Committee on Publication Ethics, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, and the World Association of Medical Editors.

Principles of Transparency
  1. Website: A journal's website, including the text that it contains, shall demonstrate that care has been taken to ensure high ethical and professional standards. It must not contain information that might mislead readers or authors, including any attempt to mimic another journal/publisher’s site. An ‘Aims & Scope’ statement should be included on the website and the readership clearly defined. There should be a statement on what a journal will consider for publication including authorship criteria (e.g., not considering multiple submissions, redundant publications) to be included. ISSNs should be clearly displayed (separate for print and electronic).
  2. Name of journal: The Journal name shall be unique and not be one that is easily confused with another journal or that might mislead potential authors and readers about the Journal’s origin or association with other journals.
  3. Peer review process: Journal content must be clearly marked as whether peer reviewed or not. Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers’ expert in the field who are not part of the journal’s editorial staff. This process, as well as any policies related to the journal’s peer review procedures, shall be clearly described on the journal website, including the method of peer review used. Journal websites should not guarantee manuscript acceptance or very short peer review times.
  4. Ownership and management: Information about the ownership and/or management of a journal shall be clearly indicated on the journal’s website. Publishers shall not use organizational or journal names that would mislead potential authors and editors about the nature of the journal’s owner.
  5. Governing body: Journals shall have editorial boards or other governing bodies whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within the journal’s scope. The full names and affiliations of the journal’s editorial board or other governing body shall be provided on the journal’s website.
  6. Editorial team/contact information: Journals shall provide the full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors on the journal website as well as contact information for the editorial office, including a full address.q
  7. Copyright and Licensing: The policy for copyright shall be clearly stated in the author guidelines and the copyright holder named on all published articles. Likewise, licensing information shall be clearly described in guidelines on the website, and licensing terms shall be indicated on all published articles, both HTML and PDFs. If authors are allowed to publish under a Creative Commons License, then any specific license requirements shall be noted. Any policies on posting of final accepted versions or published articles on third party repositories shall be clearly stated.
  8. Author fees: Any fees or charges that are required for manuscript processing and/or publishing materials in the journal shall be clearly stated in a place that is easy for potential authors to find prior to submitting their manuscripts for review or explained to authors before they begin preparing their manuscript for submission. If no such fees are charged that should also be clearly stated.
  9. Process for identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct: Publishers and editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that a journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their journal, the publisher or editor shall follow COPE’s guidelines (or equivalent) in dealing with allegations.
  10. Publication ethics: A journal shall also have policies on publishing ethics. These should be clearly visible on its website, and should refer to: i) Journal policies on authorship and contributorship; ii) How the journal will handle complaints and appeals; iii) Journal policies on conflicts of interest / competing interests; iv) Journal policies on data sharing and reproducibility; v) Journal’s policy on ethical oversight; vi) Journal’s policy on intellectual property; and vii) Journal’s options for post-publication discussions and corrections.
  11. Publishing schedule: The periodicity at which a journal publishes shall be clearly indicated.
  12. Access: The way(s) in which the journal and individual articles are available to readers and whether there is associated subscription or pay per view fees shall be stated.
  13. Archiving: A journal’s plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the journal content (for example, access to main articles via CLOCKSS or PubMed Central) in the event a journal is no longer published shall be clearly indicated.
  14. Revenue sources: Business models or revenue sources (e.g., author fees, subscriptions, advertising, reprints, institutional support, and organizational support) shall be clearly stated or otherwise evident on the journal’s website. Publishing fees or waiver status should not influence editorial decision making.
  15. Advertising: Journals shall state their advertising policy if relevant, including what types of adverts will be considered, who makes decisions regarding accepting adverts and whether they are linked to content or reader behaviour (online only) or are displayed at random. Advertisements should not be related in any way to editorial decision making and shall be kept separate from the published content.
  16. Direct marketing: Any direct marketing activities, including solicitation of manuscripts that are conducted on behalf of the journal, shall be appropriate, well targeted, and unobtrusive. Information provided about the publisher or journal is expected to be truthful and not misleading for readers or authors.

The Grassroots Institute believes that research must be conducted according to the full and appropriate ethical agenda, universally acceptable to the research community. Any issue associated to the publication ethics will be handled seriously at the Editorial Office of respective journal. The Grassroots Institute and its journals reserve the right to reject the manuscript and may contact the ethics committee or the concerning committee of the author’s institutions for appropriate actions. If authors want to retract articles, they should inform the Editorial Office of respective journal with a retraction letter explaining the reason. Authors also reserve the right to appeal against the Editor's decision on the manuscript in writing. Our journals accept papers not for business or political gain but on intellectual and ethical standards only. The Editorial Office of all our journals will also strictly monitor for plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data prior to the processing of the manuscript for review process and, if plagiarism is detected at this stage or latter, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any of our journals. Our editors will investigate any allegations of publication misconduct and may contact the authors' institutions or funders if necessary. If evidence of misconduct is found, appropriate action will be taken to correct or retract the publication. Authors are expected to comply with the best ethical publication practices when publishing.


Errors serious enough to invalidate a paper's result and conclusions may require retraction. Scientific misconduct includes, but is not necessarily limited to data fabrication, data falsification including deceptive manipulation of images, and plagiarism. The integrity of research may also be compromised by an inappropriate methodology that could lead to retraction.

Sometimes an article needs to be completely removed from the body of research literature. This could be due to inadvertent errors made during the research process, gross ethical breaches, fabrication of data, large amounts of plagiarism, or other reasons. Such articles threaten the integrity of scientific records and need to be retracted. The Grassroots Institute follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for retraction. Potential retractions are thoroughly investigated by the Editorial Office with the support of the Editorial Board and final approval by the Editor-in-Chief. Other persons and institutions will be consulted as necessary, including university authorities or experts in the field.

However, above situation requires individual assessment. When scientific misconduct is alleged, or concerns are otherwise raised about the conduct or integrity of work described in submitted or published papers, the Editors should initiate appropriate procedures detailed by such committees such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and may choose to publish an expression of concern pending the outcomes of those procedures. If the procedures involve an investigation at the authors' institution, the Editors should seek to discover the outcome of that investigation, notify readers of the outcome if appropriate, and if the investigation proves scientific misconduct, publish a retraction of the article. There may be circumstances in which no misconduct is proven, but an exchange of letters to the Editors could be published to highlight matters of debate to readers.

The validity of previous work by the author of a fraudulent paper cannot be assumed. Editors may ask the author's institution to assure them of the validity of other work published in their journals, or they may retract it. If this is not done, Editors may choose to publish an announcement expressing concern that the validity of previously published work is uncertain.

Expression of Concern

For complex, inconclusive, or prolonged situations, an Expression of Concern may be published. If investigations into alleged or suspected research misconduct have not yet been completed or prove to be inconclusive, an Editor or journal may wish to publish an Expression of Concern detailing the points of concern and what actions, if any, are in progress. This is very rarely used.

Comments and Replies

Comments are short Letters to the Editors from readers questioning either the reported results or the experimental methods used in a specific article. Usually, a reader will approach the Editorial Office or the Editor-in-Chief of a journal if he/she finds an article intriguing. In such circumstances, the Editorial Office may invite the reader to write a short and reasoned Comment on the article. After consideration and review by the Editors, the Comment may be published, in which case the Editorial Office will approach the authors of the article in question and invite them to prepare a Reply. If the reader’s Comments are substantiated, the authors or the Editorial Office may consequently publish a Correction or retract the paper entirely.

thumb-1 thumb-2 thumb-3 thumb-4 thumb-5 advt

Go to Top