Empirical research in medical ethics: How conceptual accounts on normative-empirical collaboration may improve research practice
© Salloch et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 5 August 2011
Accepted: 13 April 2012
Published: 13 April 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|5 Aug 2011||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|31 Aug 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael Dunn|
|5 Oct 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Mette Ebbesen|
|12 Oct 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Guy Widdershoven|
|18 Jan 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Sabine Salloch|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|18 Jan 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|17 Feb 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael Dunn|
|27 Feb 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Mette Ebbesen|
|2 Mar 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Guy Widdershoven|
|15 Mar 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Sabine Salloch|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|15 Mar 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|13 Apr 2012||Editorially accepted|
|13 Apr 2012||Article published||10.1186/1472-6939-13-5|
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.