Comparison of two Bayesian methods to detect mode effects between paper-based and computerized adaptive assessments: a preliminary Monte Carlo study
© Riley and Carle; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 20 October 2011
Accepted: 31 July 2012
Published: 17 August 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|20 Oct 2011||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|13 Feb 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Richard N. Jones|
|2 Mar 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Ian Kudel|
|3 May 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Barth Riley|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|3 May 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|23 May 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Richard N. Jones|
|11 Jun 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Ian Kudel|
|29 Jul 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Barth Riley|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|29 Jul 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|31 Jul 2012||Editorially accepted|
|17 Aug 2012||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-12-124|
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.