A preliminary investigation to explore the cognitive resources of physicians experiencing difficulty in training
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 9 February 2016
Accepted: 26 April 2017
Published: 15 May 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|9 Feb 2016||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|6 Apr 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Manuel Joao Costa|
|5 Jul 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Charlotte Silen|
|10 Oct 2016||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Yoon Soo Park|
|12 Dec 2016||Author responded||Author comments - Fiona Patterson|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|12 Dec 2016||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|10 Feb 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Fiona Patterson|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|10 Feb 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|18 Apr 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Fiona Patterson|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|18 Apr 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|26 Apr 2017||Editorially accepted|
|15 May 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12909-017-0918-z|
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.