Estimating required information size by quantifying diversity in random-effects model meta-analyses
© Wetterslev et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
Received: 15 May 2009
Accepted: 30 December 2009
Published: 30 December 2009
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|15 May 2009||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|6 Aug 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Rebecca Turner|
|21 Aug 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Gerta Rücker|
|24 Sep 2009||Author responded||Author comments - Jørn Wetterslev|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|24 Sep 2009||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|23 Oct 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Gerta Rücker|
|12 Nov 2009||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Rebecca Turner|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|28 Dec 2009||Author responded||Author comments - Jørn Wetterslev|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|28 Dec 2009||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|30 Dec 2009||Editorially accepted|
|30 Dec 2009||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-9-86|
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.