This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Evidence-based practice within nutrition: what are the barriers for improving the evidence and how can they be dealt with?
- Martine Laville1,
- Berenice Segrestin1,
- Maud Alligier1,
- Cristina Ruano-Rodríguez2, 3,
- Lluis Serra-Majem2, 3,
- Michael Hiesmayr4,
- Annemie Schols5,
- Carlo La Vecchia6,
- Yves Boirie7,
- Ana Rath8,
- Edmund A. M. Neugebauer9,
- Silvio Garattini10,
- Vittorio Bertele10,
- Christine Kubiak11,
- Jacques Demotes-Mainard11,
- Janus C. Jakobsen12, 13,
- Snezana Djurisic12Email authorView ORCID ID profile and
- Christian Gluud12Email author
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 24 March 2017
Accepted: 24 August 2017
Published: 11 September 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|24 Mar 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|2 Jul 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - J. V. Woodside|
|26 Jul 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Martine Laville|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|26 Jul 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|7 Aug 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - J. V. Woodside|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|24 Aug 2017||Editorially accepted|
|11 Sep 2017||Article published||10.1186/s13063-017-2160-8|
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 and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com. All previous versions of the manuscript and all author responses to the reviewers are also available.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.