This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Measuring inconsistency in research ethics committee review
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 3 July 2017
Accepted: 9 November 2017
Published: 28 November 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|3 Jul 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|1 Aug 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Gert Helgesson|
|2 Aug 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Francis Barchi|
|7 Aug 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Samantha Trace|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|7 Aug 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|9 Aug 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Francis Barchi|
|21 Aug 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Gert Helgesson|
|9 Nov 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Samantha Trace|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|9 Nov 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|9 Nov 2017||Editorially accepted|
|28 Nov 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12910-017-0224-7|
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.