This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Clarifying the distinction between case series and cohort studies in systematic reviews of comparative studies: potential impact on body of evidence and workload
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 17 January 2017
Accepted: 10 July 2017
Published: 17 July 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|17 Jan 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|22 Feb 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Mina Tadrous|
|28 Feb 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Laura Rosella|
|14 Mar 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Tim Mathes|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|14 Mar 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|23 Mar 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Mina Tadrous|
|19 Jun 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Tim Mathes|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|19 Jun 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|10 Jul 2017||Editorially accepted|
|17 Jul 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12874-017-0391-8|
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 are available by contacting email@example.com.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.