Skip to main content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Room for improvement? A survey of the methods used in systematic reviews of adverse effects

Back to article

Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

Original Submission
19 Sep 2005 Submitted Original manuscript
Resubmission - Version 2
Submitted Manuscript version 2
7 Oct 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Max Pittler
11 Oct 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Sheena Derry
17 Oct 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Deborah Ashby
Resubmission - Version 3
Submitted Manuscript version 3
2 Dec 2005 Author responded Author comments - Su Golder
Resubmission - Version 4
2 Dec 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 4
12 Dec 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Sheena Derry
15 Dec 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Deborah Ashby
16 Dec 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Max Pittler
21 Dec 2005 Author responded Author comments - Su Golder
Resubmission - Version 5
21 Dec 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 5
21 Dec 2005 Author responded Author comments - Su Golder
Resubmission - Version 6
21 Dec 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 6
Publishing
27 Jan 2006 Editorially accepted
27 Jan 2006 Article published 10.1186/1471-2288-6-3

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 are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

You can find further information about the peer review system here.

Advertisement