Comparison of five influenza surveillance systems during the 2009 pandemic and their association with media attention
© de Lange et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 13 August 2012
Accepted: 16 September 2013
Published: 24 September 2013
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|13 Aug 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|19 Sep 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Marit de Lange|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|19 Sep 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|27 Nov 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Kent Schwirian|
|3 Dec 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - James Fielding|
|11 Dec 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Katherine Smith|
|8 Feb 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Marit de Lange|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|8 Feb 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|2 Mar 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Kent Schwirian|
|7 Mar 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - James Fielding|
|7 Mar 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Katherine Smith|
|21 Jun 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Marit de Lange|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|21 Jun 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|16 Sep 2013||Editorially accepted|
|24 Sep 2013||Article published||10.1186/1471-2458-13-881|
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.