Identifying strategies to improve access to credible and relevant information for public health professionals: a qualitative study
© LaPelle et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006
Received: 22 December 2005
Accepted: 05 April 2006
Published: 05 April 2006
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|22 Dec 2005||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|18 Jan 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Maureen Dobbins|
|7 Feb 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Louise Forsetlund|
|15 Feb 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Johanna Westbrook|
|7 Mar 2006||Author responded||Author comments - Nancy LaPelle|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|7 Mar 2006||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|15 Mar 2006||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Louise Forsetlund|
|27 Mar 2006||Author responded||Author comments - Nancy LaPelle|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|27 Mar 2006||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|5 Apr 2006||Editorially accepted|
|5 Apr 2006||Article published||10.1186/1471-2458-6-89|
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.