Get your Endoscopy paper right the first time: a ready-made structure with the right abstract and citations, so editors see your science, not formatting slips.
4
Authored by Sumalatha Gangadhar | Published on 10 August, 2026
Submitting to Endoscopy goes smoothly when your draft already matches the journal's own rules. Editors screen new manuscripts against the Endoscopy guide for authors before peer review, so formatting, structure, and required statements should be right on the first draft rather than repaired during upload. This template sets that structure up for you.
It is a manuscript shell aligned to Endoscopy. It covers front matter, the abstract the journal expects, a body organized to the journal's article types, and a reference list in the journal's required style. Confirm current scope and article types on the Endoscopy journal page before you draft.
Prepare the title, authors, affiliations, and ORCID iDs. Write the abstract to the journal's rule and word limit, organize the body to the article type, and apply the required reference style from the first citation. Complete every declaration (ethics, competing interests, funding, data availability) the Endoscopy guide for authors lists, and cite figures and tables in order.
The common failure modes are formatting or reference style that does not match the guide for authors, missing required statements, and an incomplete portal checklist. Clear all three against the Endoscopy guide for authors before you submit.
The shell mirrors what editorial staff check first: article-type fit, the abstract rules, required declarations, and the journal's reference style. For more detail see the author resources. When your draft is ready, upload it through ScholarOne (Manuscript Central).
| Element | Endoscopy requirement |
|---|---|
| Abstract | Structured abstract required for Original Articles and Innovations and brief communications (IBCs). Original Articles: max 250 words, structured with mandatory headings: Background and study aims (one or two sentences outlining previous work and defining study aims), Patients and methods (relevant information on patients, study design, analyses and outcome measures), Results (primary and secondary outcome measures and most relevant results), Conclusions (one or two sentences with clinical conclusion). Systematic Reviews: max 250 words, structured. IBCs: max 200 words, structured as for Original Articles. Endoscopy New Horizons: no abstract, but requires single-sentence summary under 'What's New?' heading. Letters to the Editor: no abstract required |
| Main text | Original Articles: max 3500 words (plus structured abstract max 250 words, max 6 tables/figures combined, 35 references). Systematic Reviews: max 3500 words (plus abstract max 250 words, max 6 tables/figures combined). Innovations and brief communications (IBCs): max 2000 words (plus structured abstract max 200 words, 20 references, described as 'Five pages max'). Endoscopy New Horizons: max 1000 words (no abstract, max 2 tables/figures combined, max 10 references). Letters to the Editor: max 300 words (no abstract, 5 references) |
| Declarations | Ethics approval/consent as applicable; competing interests; funding; data availability |
| Figures/tables | Publication-ready; cited in order |
| Supplemental | Upload separately when used |
| Keywords | Keywords are mentioned as part of the title page submission requirements (in the ScholarOne Prefill Tool section noting title, abstract, keywords, author names, affiliations, and funding details). However, the official guidelines do not specify a required count, range, or whether they are mandatory, optional, or editor-assigned. Review of published articles in the journal shows typically 4 keywords per article, but no explicit requirement is stated in the author instructions |
| References | Numbered system: references indicated in text, tables, and illustrations by Arabic numbers in square brackets, listed in order of citation. For articles with more than four authors, first three authors are given followed by 'et al.' EndNote style file available for requested formatting. Follows NLM (National Library of Medicine) recommendations for reference formatting. Examples provided include journal articles, books, online sources, and preprints with DOI/URL |
| Peer review | Single-anonymized (single-blind): Thieme journals typically perform single-anonymized peer review where reviewers know who the authors are, but the reviewer's identity is not revealed to the authors. Many Thieme journals offer the option of double-anonymized peer review where the reviewer is not aware of the identity of the author and the author is not aware of the identity of the reviewers |
| Submission | mc.manuscriptcentral.com/endoscopy |
Read the Endoscopy guide for authors once before drafting and once before upload. Draft the abstract after results are stable. Set the reference style before adding citations. Keep a cover letter that states your contribution and fit to Endoscopy in under a page.
Skim two or three recent Endoscopy papers to calibrate depth and figure style. Make the novelty clear in the first two pages. Deposit data and code when the policy on the Endoscopy journal page requires it. Disclose any preprint or conference version with identifiers in the cover letter.
Do one focused pass against the Endoscopy guide for authors: scope, length, reference style, required declarations, and figure quality. Then submit through ScholarOne (Manuscript Central).