Overstating the evidence – double counting in meta-analysis and related problems
© Senn; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
Received: 18 December 2008
Accepted: 13 February 2009
Published: 13 February 2009
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|18 Dec 2008||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|14 Jan 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Lehana Thabane|
|28 Jan 2009||Author responded||Author comments - Stephen Senn|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|28 Jan 2009||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|13 Feb 2009||Editorially accepted|
|13 Feb 2009||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-9-10|
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.