A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting
© Chen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 31 October 2012
Accepted: 28 May 2013
Published: 11 June 2013
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|31 Oct 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|13 Dec 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Daniela Goncalves|
|7 Jan 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Joanne Greenhalgh|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|9 Mar 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Jack Chen|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|9 Mar 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|21 Mar 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Daniela Goncalves|
|15 Apr 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Joanne Greenhalgh|
|7 May 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Jack Chen|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|7 May 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|22 May 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Joanne Greenhalgh|
|Resubmission - Version 6|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 6|
|28 May 2013||Editorially accepted|
|11 Jun 2013||Article published||10.1186/1472-6963-13-211|
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.