Are two readers more reliable than one? A study of upper neck ligament scoring on magnetic resonance images
© Espeland et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 2 November 2011
Accepted: 16 January 2013
Published: 17 January 2013
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|2 Nov 2011||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|7 Nov 2011||Author responded||Author comments - Ansgar Espeland|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|7 Nov 2011||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|30 Jun 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Pedro Machado|
|24 Oct 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Ulrich Weber|
|3 Dec 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Ansgar Espeland|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|3 Dec 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|3 Jan 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Pedro Machado|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|16 Jan 2013||Editorially accepted|
|17 Jan 2013||Article published||10.1186/1471-2342-13-4|
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.