Open Peer Review Reports for: Can postponement of an adverse outcome be used to present risk reductions to a lay audience? A population survey
Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.
| Original Submission | ||
|---|---|---|
| 30 Sep 2006 | Submitted | Original manuscript |
| 13 Oct 2006 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Malcolm Man-Son-Hing |
| 7 Dec 2006 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Elizabeth Murray |
| 21 Feb 2007 | Author responded | Author comments - Rasmus Dahl |
| Resubmission - Version 2 | ||
| 21 Feb 2007 | Submitted | Manuscript version 2 |
| 26 Feb 2007 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Malcolm Man-Son-Hing |
| 14 Mar 2007 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Elizabeth Murray |
| 21 Mar 2007 | Author responded | Author comments - Rasmus Dahl |
| Resubmission - Version 3 | ||
| 21 Mar 2007 | Submitted | Manuscript version 3 |
| 21 Mar 2007 | Author responded | Author comments - Rasmus Dahl |
| Resubmission - Version 4 | ||
| 21 Mar 2007 | Submitted | Manuscript version 4 |
| 29 Mar 2007 | Author responded | Author comments - Rasmus Dahl |
| Resubmission - Version 5 | ||
| 29 Mar 2007 | Submitted | Manuscript version 5 |
| Publishing | ||
| 29 Mar 2007 | Editorially accepted | |
| 29 Mar 2007 | Article published | 10.1186/1472-6947-7-8 |
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 info@biomedcentral.com.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.
