This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Duration of the common cold and similar continuous outcomes should be analyzed on the relative scale: a case study of two zinc lozenge trials
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 30 August 2016
Accepted: 2 May 2017
Published: 12 May 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|30 Aug 2016||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|9 Nov 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jan Friedrich|
|17 Apr 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Harri Hemilä|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|17 Apr 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|18 Apr 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jan Friedrich|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|2 May 2017||Editorially accepted|
|12 May 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12874-017-0356-y|
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.