This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
Virtual patients in the acquisition of clinical reasoning skills: does presentation mode matter? A quasi-randomized controlled trial
© The Author(s). 2017
Received: 23 January 2017
Accepted: 5 September 2017
Published: 15 September 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|23 Jan 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|16 Feb 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Adam Wilson|
|22 Feb 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Sven Anders|
|25 Feb 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Nikolai Schuelper|
|10 Mar 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Valerie Dory|
|13 Apr 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Fabian Schubach|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|13 Apr 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|18 Apr 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Sven Anders|
|17 May 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Valerie Dory|
|30 May 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Fabian Schubach|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|30 May 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|23 Aug 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Fabian Schubach|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|23 Aug 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|5 Sep 2017||Editorially accepted|
|15 Sep 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12909-017-1004-2|
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.