Clinical decision support must be useful, functional is not enough: a qualitative study of computer-based clinical decision support in primary care
© Kortteisto et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 13 December 2011
Accepted: 5 October 2012
Published: 8 October 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|13 Dec 2011||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|2 Feb 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Alexander Fiks|
|26 Mar 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Sam Amirfar|
|28 Mar 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Khaled Abdel-Kader|
|12 Apr 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Sheryl Davies|
|10 Aug 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Tiina Kortteisto|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|10 Aug 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|16 Aug 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Khaled Abdel-Kader|
|29 Aug 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Alexander Fiks|
|30 Sep 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Tiina Kortteisto|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|30 Sep 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|5 Oct 2012||Editorially accepted|
|8 Oct 2012||Article published||10.1186/1472-6963-12-349|
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.