Systematic reviews of prognosis studies: a critical appraisal of five core clinical journals
© The Author(s) 2017
Received: 24 August 2016
Accepted: 22 December 2016
Published: 16 March 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|24 Aug 2016||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|14 Sep 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jan Verbakel|
|14 Sep 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Christiana Naaktgeboren|
|19 Oct 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Davide Matino|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|19 Oct 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|3 Nov 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Christiana Naaktgeboren|
|8 Nov 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jan Verbakel|
|6 Dec 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Davide Matino|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|6 Dec 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|18 Dec 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Davide Matino|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|18 Dec 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|22 Dec 2016||Editorially accepted|
|16 Mar 2017||Article published||10.1186/s41512-017-0008-z|
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 firstname.lastname@example.org. 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.