This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Ethical issues in pragmatic randomized controlled trials: a review of the recent literature identifies gaps in ethical argumentation
© The Author(s). 2018
Received: 10 November 2017
Accepted: 19 February 2018
Published: 27 February 2018
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|10 Nov 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|31 Dec 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Evert V. Van Leeuwen|
|4 Jan 2018||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Raffaella Ravinetto|
|26 Jan 2018||Author responded||Author comments - Cory Goldstein|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|26 Jan 2018||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|6 Feb 2018||Author responded||Author comments - Cory Goldstein|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|6 Feb 2018||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|19 Feb 2018||Editorially accepted|
|27 Feb 2018||Article published||10.1186/s12910-018-0253-x|
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 email@example.com.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.