Skip to main content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Assessing the potential for outcome reporting bias in a review: a tutorial

Back to article

Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting editorial@trialsjournal.com.

Original Submission
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
Publishing
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 info@biomedcentral.com.

You can find further information about the peer review system here.

Advertisement