An alternative to the hand searching gold standard: validating methodological search filters using relative recall
© Sampson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006
Received: 09 March 2006
Accepted: 18 July 2006
Published: 18 July 2006
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|9 Mar 2006||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|29 Mar 2006||Author responded||Author comments - Margaret Sampson|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|29 Mar 2006||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|3 Apr 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Pamela Royle|
|28 Apr 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Carolyn Green|
|20 Jun 2006||Author responded||Author comments - Margaret Sampson|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|20 Jun 2006||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|23 Jun 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Pamela Royle|
|10 Jul 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Carolyn Green|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|18 Jul 2006||Editorially accepted|
|18 Jul 2006||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-6-33|
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.