Procedure versus process: ethical paradigms and the conduct of qualitative research
© Pollock; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 17 May 2012
Accepted: 18 September 2012
Published: 27 September 2012
Open Peer Review reports
|17 May 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|20 Jun 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Edwin van Teijlingen|
|3 Jul 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael McDonald|
|10 Aug 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Kristian Pollock|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|10 Aug 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|23 Aug 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael McDonald|
|8 Sep 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Edwin van Teijlingen|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|18 Sep 2012||Editorially accepted|
|27 Sep 2012||Article published||10.1186/1472-6939-13-25|
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.