Research gaps identified during systematic reviews of clinical trials: glass-ionomer cements
© Mickenautsch licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 28 October 2011
Accepted: 22 June 2012
Published: 29 June 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|28 Oct 2011||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|26 Apr 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Cor van Loveren|
|29 Apr 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Roeland De Moor|
|20 May 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Steffen Mickenautsch|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|20 May 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|4 Jun 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Cor van Loveren|
|7 Jun 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Steffen Mickenautsch|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|7 Jun 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|22 Jun 2012||Editorially accepted|
|29 Jun 2012||Article published||10.1186/1472-6831-12-18|
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 email@example.com. 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.