Shortening a survey and using alternative forms of prenotification: Impact on response rate and quality
© Beebe et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010
Received: 23 February 2010
Accepted: 8 June 2010
Published: 8 June 2010
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|23 Feb 2010||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|11 Mar 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jonathan VanGeest|
|11 Mar 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Helene Feveile|
|16 Mar 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jennifer Powers|
|22 Mar 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Marie Pirotta|
|8 Apr 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Ellen Funkhouser|
|5 May 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Timothy Beebe|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|5 May 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|12 May 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jennifer Powers|
|19 May 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Timothy Beebe|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|19 May 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|3 Jun 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Timothy Beebe|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|3 Jun 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|8 Jun 2010||Editorially accepted|
|8 Jun 2010||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-10-50|
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.