This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
A comparison of the test-negative and the traditional case-control study designs for estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness under nonrandom vaccination
© The Author(s) 2017
Received: 19 January 2017
Accepted: 16 November 2017
Published: 8 December 2017
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|19 Jan 2017||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|29 May 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Eelko Hak|
|23 Jun 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Joshua Petrie|
|30 Aug 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Meng Shi|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|30 Aug 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|20 Sep 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Joshua Petrie|
|21 Sep 2017||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Eelko Hak|
|9 Oct 2017||Author responded||Author comments - Meng Shi|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|9 Oct 2017||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|16 Nov 2017||Editorially accepted|
|8 Dec 2017||Article published||10.1186/s12879-017-2838-2|
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 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.