Imputation strategies for missing binary outcomes in cluster randomized trials
© Ma et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
Received: 12 October 2010
Accepted: 16 February 2011
Published: 16 February 2011
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|12 Oct 2010||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|13 Nov 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Martin Gulliford|
|16 Nov 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael Campbell|
|17 Nov 2010||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Alexis Turgeon|
|10 Dec 2010||Author responded||Author comments - Lehana Thabane|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|10 Dec 2010||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|8 Jan 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Alexis Turgeon|
|21 Jan 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael Campbell|
|8 Feb 2011||Author responded||Author comments - Lehana Thabane|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|8 Feb 2011||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|13 Feb 2011||Author responded||Author comments - Lehana Thabane|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|13 Feb 2011||Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|16 Feb 2011||Editorially accepted|
|16 Feb 2011||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-11-18|
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.