Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Familiar ethical issues amplified: how members of research ethics committees describe ethical distinctions between disaster and non-disaster research

Back to article

Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

Original Submission
13 Jan 2017 Submitted Original manuscript
27 Feb 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Hallvard Fossheim
4 Mar 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Signe Mezinska
15 Mar 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Roger Strand
12 Apr 2017 Author responded Author comments - Catherine Tansey
Resubmission - Version 2
12 Apr 2017 Submitted Manuscript version 2
22 May 2017 Author responded Author comments - Catherine Tansey
Resubmission - Version 3
22 May 2017 Submitted Manuscript version 3
12 Jun 2017 Author responded Author comments - Catherine Tansey
Resubmission - Version 4
12 Jun 2017 Submitted Manuscript version 4
Publishing
19 Jun 2017 Editorially accepted
28 Jun 2017 Article published 10.1186/s12910-017-0203-z

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 are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

You can find further information about the peer review system here.

Advertisement