Assessing the potential for outcome reporting bias in a review: a tutorial
Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting email@example.com.
|9 Jul 2009||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|14 Aug 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Sally Hopewell|
|20 Aug 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Paul Shekelle|
|24 Aug 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Kay Dickersin|
|25 Aug 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Hannah Rothstein|
|26 Feb 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Kerry Dwan|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|26 Feb 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|26 Mar 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - David Moher|
|16 Apr 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Kerry Dwan|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|16 Apr 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|10 May 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Kerry Dwan|
|Resubmission - Version 6|
|10 May 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 6|
|12 May 2010||Editorially accepted|
|12 May 2010||Article published||10.1186/1745-6215-11-52|
How does Open Peer Review work?
Open peer review is a system where authors know who the reviewers are, and the reviewers know who the authors are. If the manuscript is accepted, the named reviewer reports are published alongside the article. Pre-publication versions of the article are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.