Comparison of population-averaged and cluster-specific models for the analysis of cluster randomized trials with missing binary outcomes: a simulation study
© Ma et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 16 August 2012
Accepted: 14 January 2013
Published: 23 January 2013
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|16 Aug 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|10 Sep 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Martin Gulliford|
|13 Sep 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Dan Jackson|
|23 Nov 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Lehana Thabane|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|23 Nov 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|30 Nov 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Martin Gulliford|
|4 Dec 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Dan Jackson|
|20 Dec 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Lehana Thabane|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|20 Dec 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|9 Jan 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Lehana Thabane|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|9 Jan 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|14 Jan 2013||Editorially accepted|
|23 Jan 2013||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-13-9|
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.