Skip to main content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Comparing multiple competing interventions in the absence of randomized trials using clinical risk-benefit analysis

Back to article

Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

Original Submission
22 Oct 2010 Submitted Original manuscript
9 Feb 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Francisco-José Vázquez-Polo
20 Jun 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Slobodan Jankovic
27 Jun 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Mohamed Shoukri
28 Jun 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Javier Mar
15 Oct 2011 Author responded Author comments - Alejandro Lazo-Langner
Resubmission - Version 2
15 Oct 2011 Submitted Manuscript version 2
20 Oct 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Mohamed Shoukri
20 Oct 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Javier Mar
11 Nov 2011 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Francisco-José Vázquez-Polo
7 Dec 2011 Author responded Author comments - Alejandro Lazo-Langner
Resubmission - Version 3
7 Dec 2011 Submitted Manuscript version 3
9 Jan 2012 Author responded Author comments - Alejandro Lazo-Langner
Resubmission - Version 4
9 Jan 2012 Submitted Manuscript version 4
Publishing
10 Jan 2012 Editorially accepted
10 Jan 2012 Article published 10.1186/1471-2288-12-3

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 info@biomedcentral.com.

You can find further information about the peer review system here.

Advertisement