This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
A comparison of analytic approaches for individual patient data meta-analyses with binary outcomes
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 29 March 2016
Accepted: 2 February 2017
Published: 16 February 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting email@example.com.
|29 Mar 2016||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|22 Apr 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Mark Simmonds|
|18 May 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Thomas Debray|
|6 Sep 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Doneal Thomas|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|6 Sep 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|23 Sep 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Thomas Debray|
|30 Sep 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Mark Simmonds|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|31 Jan 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Doneal Thomas|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|31 Jan 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|2 Feb 2017||Editorially accepted|
|16 Feb 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12874-017-0307-7|
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 are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.