This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Accounting for treatment use when validating a prognostic model: a simulation study
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 17 February 2017
Accepted: 26 June 2017
Published: 14 July 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|17 Feb 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|24 Mar 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Matthew Sperrin|
|7 Apr 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Paolo Eusebi|
|7 Apr 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - David Van Klaveren|
|23 May 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Romin Pajouheshnia|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|23 May 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|23 Jun 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Romin Pajouheshnia|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|23 Jun 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|26 Jun 2017||Editorially accepted|
|14 Jul 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12874-017-0375-8|
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.