This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Development and evaluation of a quality score for abstracts
© Timmer et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2003
Received: 26 July 2002
Accepted: 11 February 2003
Published: 11 February 2003
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|26 Jul 2002||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|8 Sep 2002||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - David Moher|
|13 Sep 2002||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Roberta Scherer|
|6 Nov 2002||Author responded||Author comments - Antje Timmer|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|6 Nov 2002||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|22 Nov 2002||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Roberta Scherer|
|10 Dec 2002||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - David Moher|
|18 Jan 2003||Author responded||Author comments - Antje Timmer|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|18 Jan 2003||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|24 Jan 2003||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - David Moher|
|6 Feb 2003||Author responded||Author comments - Antje Timmer|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|6 Feb 2003||Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|11 Feb 2003||Editorially accepted|
|11 Feb 2003||Article published||10.1186/1471-2288-3-2|
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.