This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Adapting the nominal group technique for priority setting of evidence-practice gaps in implementation science
© The Author(s). 2016
Received: 14 July 2015
Accepted: 11 August 2016
Published: 26 August 2016
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|14 Jul 2015||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|16 Nov 2015||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jennifer Arney|
|27 Jun 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Sarah Wackerbarth|
|28 Jul 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Nicole M Rankin|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|28 Jul 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|10 Aug 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Nicole M Rankin|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|10 Aug 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|11 Aug 2016||Editorially accepted|
|26 Aug 2016||Article published||10.1186/s12874-016-0210-7|
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.