Does a quality improvement campaign accelerate take-up of new evidence? A ten-state cluster-randomized controlled trial of the Institute for Health Improvement’s Project JOINTS
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 12 August 2016
Accepted: 28 March 2017
Published: 17 April 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|12 Aug 2016||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|16 Sep 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Eric Schneider|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|16 Sep 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|26 Oct 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Jo Rycroft-Malone|
|3 Nov 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Bryan Jeffrey Weiner|
|25 Jan 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Eric Schneider|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|25 Jan 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|20 Mar 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Bryan Jeffrey Weiner|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|28 Mar 2017||Editorially accepted|
|17 Apr 2017||Article published||10.1186/s13012-017-0579-7|
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.