Submission Preparation ChecklistAs part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
- The submission file is in Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format.
- The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Information For Authors which is found in About the Journal.
It is an absolute requirement that no part of the scientific content of submitted manuscripts has ever been published in any language. At the time of submission, during the review process and till a formal answer by the Editor of the Annals of Gastroenterology (referred to as “the Journal” hereafter) the manuscript should not be under consideration for publication by any other scientific journal or book. In contrast, content of submitted or published manuscripts may be presented in any congress before or after submission, if allowed so by the congress organizers. As part of the review process, text in all versions of submitted manuscripts is scanned for plagiarism.
If duplicate content or plagiarism (over a reasonable cut-off) are detected, the Editor of the Journal will formally request an explanation by the corresponding Author, if not proactively provided. The Editor may consider such explanations satisfactory or may abort the manuscript with a letter carbon-copied to all the authors.
It is the Corresponding Author’s responsibility to ensure that each person listed as an author has contributed to the study to a significant extent. A detailed description of each author’s contribution is not to be submitted. Persons with a lower degree of involvement in the study may be acknowledged. Individuals who provide writing assistance and the funding source for this may be included in the “Acknowledgements” section.
Authors may be added in revised versions of the manuscript, as long as revisions requested were addressed with extra work on experiments, statistics or analysis and this task was undertaken by an individual not included in the previous Authors’ list. The Editor of the Journal requires full transparency when new Authors are added. Hence, their contribution should be analyzed in the response to the Editor or to the Reviewers.
The Journal, its Editor, Associate Editors, Section Editors, Reviewers and Publisher declare no responsibility on authorship disputes. Authorship declined by an author after submission of a manuscript is expected to be reasoned in writing and should infer no concerns on the validity of the paper. If the latter is not true, the Editor will abort the manuscript.
Although the Editor and the Reviewers make every effort to ensure the validity of published manuscripts, the final responsibility rests with the Corresponding, the First and the rest of the Authors, but not with the Journal, its Editor, Section Editors, Reviewers or Publisher.
The Journal takes for granted that research on
- humans was carried out in accordance with the latest update of the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/),
- health databases and biobanks abided to the latest update of the Declaration of Taipei (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-taipei-on-ethical-considerations-regarding-health-databases-and-biobanks/) and
- clinical trials was compliant to the Clinical Trials Regulation by the European Medicines Agency (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014R0536) or regulations by the United States Food and Drug Administration (https://www.fda.gov/science-research/clinical-trials-and-human-subject-protection/regulations-good-clinical-practice-and-clinical-trials), depending on where research took place.
Beyond international directives, clinical trials and collection of demographic and health data must have been approved by the ethics committee of the institution research was carried into and there should be such a statement in the “Materials and Methods” section of the manuscript. Additional regulations required by the institution each author is affiliated should be also observed. The same applies to local and national laws.
Privacy and Informed Consent
We are stringent on the Authors’ responsibility to ensure patients’ anonymity and to verify that any experimental investigation with human subjects was performed after written, informed consent that can be revoked at any time. Special care should be taken so that any evidence compromising patients’ anonymity- like, but not limited to first name, last name, initials, social security number, hospital numbers, pedigrees, photographs showing face, tattoos, unusual body deformities- does not appear in any document submitted to the Journal. If for any reason such information needs to be included in the paper, informed consent for this purpose is needed after demonstrating the manuscript to be published to the patient.
For animal experimentation, it is expected that investigators will have observed the United Sates Animal Welfare Act (https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/awa/awa.pdf) and Regulations (https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-9). Approval by local Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC) should have been obtained and relevant rules should have been observed. In addition, all animal studies must have been approved by the local Institutional Review Board (IRB) and carried out in line with national regulations and laws.
In the Materials and Methods Section, authors should clearly reason the necessity to use animals versus alternative research approaches and their strategy to reduce the number of animals sacrificed.
Conflicts of Interest and Funding
Authors are responsible for recognizing and disclosing all financial and other conflicts of interest that might bias their work. Public trust in the peer review process and the credibility of published articles depend on how well conflict of interest is handled during writing, peer review and editorial decision making. Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author's institution), reviewer or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions and decisions. Examples are: dual commitments, competing interests or loyalties. However, conflicts can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition and intellectual passion.
These relationships range in a spectrum from those with negligible potential to those with great potential to influence judgment. Not all relationships represent true conflict of interest. The potential for conflict of interest may exist whether or not an individual believes that the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Disclosing every possible conflict of interest is the most fruitful way to enhance the validity and credibility of a study.
Authors should also acknowledge in the manuscript all financial direct or indirect support for the study. Employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria and paid expert testimony are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the study and, hence, the authors, the Journal and science itself. Full disclosure of the aforementioned is also required.
Manuscripts are accepted for publication on the understanding that, in case of acceptance, the copyright remains with the authors and the article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-ND 4.0) International Public License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0). This permits redistribution of published material, commercially or non-commercially, but does not allow any changes (no derivatives) of the original work. Content must be shared in its entirety, while crediting the original creator with a proper citation It does not allow anyone to expand upon the original content or remix it.
Manuscripts Considered for Publication
The Journal will consider for publication manuscripts on clinical and/ or basic research on Gastroenterology and Hepatology, including medical and surgical management. Manuscripts should abide to the “Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals” by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The complete document appears at https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf.
The Journal publishes the following types of papers:
- Literature Reviews by invitation or spontaneous submission
- Guidelines of Medical Associations
- Letters to the Editor commenting on Articles published in the Journal within 4 weeks from publication (to be forwarded to the Authors of the Article with an opportunity to reply)
- Letter in Reply
- Editorials by invitation only
Manuscripts must by typewritten and double spaced. They should include the following sections, each one starting on a separate page:
The title page should include the following:
- complete manuscript title (avoid using abbreviations),
- running head (short title),
- full names of Authors, followed by sequential numbers in superscript denoting his/ her affiliation,
- each number (in superscript) followed by the department and institution it corresponds to,
- full name, doctoral degree(s), departmental address and email of the Corresponding Author,
- conflict of interest disclosure and
- declaration of funding sources.
Abstract and Keywords
An abstract of no more than 250 words is required. For Original Articles it should be structured as follows: Background, Methods, Results, Conclusion. For Reviews, Guidelines and Meta-Analyses it should be non-structured. Avoid using abbreviations. If used, each abbreviation should be defined at first mention, unless it is a standard unit of measurement.
Three to 5 keywords should be listed next.
Letters to the Editor, Letters in Reply and Editorials should not have an abstract or keywords.
The maximum length of the main text is 5,000 words for Reviews, 3,500 for Original Articles, 1500 for Editorials, and 300 for Letters to the Editor or in Reply.
Original Articles should be structured into the following sections: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Acknowledgements, Summary Box, References, Tables, Figure legends, Figures, Supplemental data. For other kinds of submissions, Authors may deviate from the “Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion” part of the structure in a way they judge optimal.
A list of abbreviations is not required, but each abbreviation should be defined at first mention, even if it has been explained in the abstract. The same is true for abbreviations in Table footnotes and Figure Legends. Do not define abbreviations for standard units of measurement.
State the objectives of the study and provide an adequate, focused- but not lengthy- background, avoiding detailed review of the literature. Avoid overlap with the following sections.
Materials and Methods
Methods should be detailed enough for reviewers to assess the quality of the study design and for independent researchers to reproduce the study. Reliability and reproducibility of reported results rely on solid methodology.
The Journal supports uniform reporting. Authors should report
- randomized, controlled trials according to the “Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials” (CONSORT) guidelines (http://www.consort-statement.org),
- observational studies in line with “STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology” (STROBE) statement (http://www.strobe-statement.org),
- diagnostic accuracy studies following the “Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy” (STARD) (http://www.stard-statement.org) and
- systematic reviews and meta-analyses adhering to the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) statement (http://www.prisma-statement.org).
For clinical trials and collection of demographic and health data, a statement that they were approved by the ethics committee of the institution research was carried into is required. If animals were used, authors should also clearly reason the necessity to use animals versus alternative research approaches and analyze their strategy to reduce the number of animals sacrificed. A statement that animal use was approved by the local IACUC (if there is one in place) and the local IRB is also required.
Statistics used to draw conclusions should adhere to the “Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals” (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21808590). Description of statistical methods should be detailed enough to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to verify the reported results. Quantitative findings should be presented with the appropriate measure of central tendency and dispersion relevant to data distribution. Relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing (p values) to draw conclusions fails to convey information on effect size. Abbreviations of statistical terms and symbols should be also defined at first use, just like any other abbreviation. Computer software and version used for statistics should be also reported.
Results should be presented with precision, but please limit statistics reported in these leading to meaningful conclusions, do not duplicate information contained in tables and figures and do not discuss their importance.
Discussion should be relevant to the results of the study; please do not provide a general overview of the topic. We encourage comparing results to these of similar studies and analyzing the weak and the strong points of the study.
A paragraph with conclusions and future perspectives should end the text.
Acknowledgements should be made only to those who have made a substantial contribution to the study. Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission from people acknowledged by name in case readers infer their endorsement of data and conclusions.
For Original Articles a summary box is required to summarize the reasons to conduct the study and to denote the novel findings. The following 2 sections are required:
- What is already known about this subject: 3-4 bullet points
- What are the new findings: 3-4 bullet points
References should be numbered in Arabic numerals (N) followed by a dot, in same order they appear in the text. Authors and Editors should be cited with full last name (or names separated by “-”) first with the first letter only capitalized and then the initial(s) only of first name(s) in capitals without dot(s). Multiple Authors or Editors should be separated by commas. If the Authors or Editors are 7 or more, please list only the first 3 and instead of a fourth one type “et al”. End page is written in full. Unpublished data should be referenced only in the text followed by “(Unpublished observations)”. In contrast, information from websites should be in the list of references. The maximum number of references for Reviews is 100, for Original articles 50, for Editorials 20 and for Letters to the Editor is 10. Format specific types of references as follows:
- Author(s). Title of the paper. Journal abbreviation (in italics) Year of Publication;Volume (in bold):Start page-End page.
- Rokkas T, Rokka A, Portincasa P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of Helicobacter pylori eradication in preventing gastric cancer. Ann Gastroenterol 2017;30:414-423.
- Book author(s). Book title. (Editor, )volume, publication, publisher, city, year, relevant start page-end page.
- Sleisenger MH, Feldman M, Friedman LS, Brandt LJ. Sleisenger and Fordtran's gastrointestinal and liver disease: Pathophysiology, diagnosis, management. 10th edition, Volume 1, Saunders/Elsevier, Philadelphia, 2010, 1990-1991.
- (Chapter author(s). )Title of the chapter. In book: Book author(s). Book title. (Editor, )volume, publication, publisher, city, year, relevant start page-end page.
- Sands B, Siegel C. Crohn’s Disease. In: Sleisenger MH, Feldman M, Friedman LS, Brandt LJ. Sleisenger and Fordtran's gastrointestinal and liver disease: Pathophysiology, diagnosis, management. 10th edition, Volume 1, Saunders/Elsevier, Philadelphia, 2010, 1995-1996.
- Organization. Title of the document. Year. Available from: url [Accessed on Day Month in writing Year].
1, World Health Organization. Covid-19 Explorer. 2022. Available from: https://worldhealthorg.shinyapps.io/covid [Accessed on 17 April 2022].
Tables and Figures
The maximum cumulative number of tables and figures in Original Articles and Letters to the Editor is 6 and 1 respectively. For Reviews and Meta-Analyses the cumulative number of tables and figures should be maximum 6 and minimum 4.
Each table should be typewritten in a separate page and numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals (N). It should have a title starting with “Table N. ” in bold and after that a short and concise title (not in bold). Lines should be double-spaced. Vertical and horizontal lines should be limited to a minimum number. Explanatory material should be in footnotes and any non-standard abbreviation should be explained (once more even if it has been explained in the text). If data from another published or unpublished source are used, obtain permission and acknowledge fully.
A figure legend should contain sufficient information to make the series of figures and figure legends a stand-alone, comprehensible story, without the reader having to refer to the text. Key all the legends together in a separate page.
Each figure should be submitted as a separate file of JPEG or TIFF format with a resolution of at least 300 dots per inch (dpi) and numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. In case of micrographs superimposing a scale bar is preferred over a magnification factor in the figure legend.
In case of an individual’s photograph, either s/he must not be identifiable by any means or written permission by the individual or for use of the photograph must accompany the manuscript. For more details see the “Privacy and Informed Consent” section.
If a figure has been published previously, acknowledge the original source and submit written permission from the copyright holder to reproduce it.
The Editors could reward the authors by publishing each month the best figure in color free of charge on the cover page.
Submissions may be accompanied by supplemental material, such as videos, additional tables or figures. Videos should be in MOV, AVI or MPEG format. Such material will be posted to the electronic version of the manuscript as is. It is also subject to peer review.
Manuscript Process and Review
Submission to Annals of Gastroenterology proceeds totally on-line at http://www.annalsgastro.gr/index.php/annalsgastro/submission/wizard. Online registration for first-time users is required to obtain a Username and Password. The submission platform is generic; thus, a manuscript may be successfully submitted even if it does not abide to the aforementioned manuscript formats. In such cases, a rejection notice without any review process is to be expected within the next few days. Authors will be able to track the progress of the manuscript through the online system.
A submission cover letter to the Editor should accompany the manuscript. It should contain a statement by the authors that:
- The manuscript has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract in a congress) and is not under consideration (in whole or in part) for publication elsewhere.
- The manuscript is approved by all Authors.
- In case of acceptance, the copyright remains with the authors and the article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-ND 4.0) International Public License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0).
Each manuscript submitted to the Journal is first evaluated by the Editor or an Associate Editor and assigned to an appropriate Section Editor with expertise in the field. The Section Editor initially evaluates the manuscript’s appropriateness and competitivity for publication in the Journal and initiates a rigorous review process by addressing to 2-4 reviewers who are also experts in the field. Thus, about 4-6 experts go through all the manuscripts before they are accepted for publication.
The reviewers remain anonymous, treat the manuscript and relevant communications as confidential and provide comments to the editor and the authors.
An initial response to the authors should be awaited within 3-4 weeks after submission.
The Journal does not charge any fees for submission, processing or publication of the manuscripts.
As soon as a manuscript has been edited and typeset, a copy of the galley proof will be sent to the Corresponding Author. Timely correction by the latter is anticipated to secure a speedy publication of the manuscript. At this stage, only minor corrections of the manuscript are allowed.
Editorial Office Contact Data
Annals of Gastroenterology,
67, Demokratias Avn,
GR 154 51,
Personal data provided in this journal website will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.