Skip to main content

Peer Review reports

From: Comparing conventional and Bayesian workflows for clinical outcome prediction modelling with an exemplar cohort study of severe COVID-19 infection incorporating clinical biomarker test results

Original Submission
18 Dec 2023 Submitted Original manuscript
Resubmission - Version 2
Submitted Manuscript version 2
Resubmission - Version 3
Submitted Manuscript version 3
26 Apr 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
27 Apr 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Steve Harris
27 Apr 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
29 Apr 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
19 Oct 2024 Author responded Author comments - Brian Sullivan
Resubmission - Version 4
19 Oct 2024 Submitted Manuscript version 4
24 Oct 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
26 Oct 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
7 Nov 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
13 Nov 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
9 Dec 2024 Author responded Author comments - Brian Sullivan
Resubmission - Version 5
9 Dec 2024 Submitted Manuscript version 5
10 Dec 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
14 Dec 2024 Reviewed Reviewer Report
24 Jan 2025 Author responded Author comments - Brian Sullivan
Resubmission - Version 6
24 Jan 2025 Submitted Manuscript version 6
3 Feb 2025 Reviewed Reviewer Report
4 Feb 2025 Reviewed Reviewer Report
12 Feb 2025 Author responded Author comments - Brian Sullivan
Resubmission - Version 7
12 Feb 2025 Submitted Manuscript version 7
20 Feb 2025 Author responded Author comments - Brian Sullivan
Resubmission - Version 8
20 Feb 2025 Submitted Manuscript version 8
Publishing
26 Feb 2025 Editorially accepted
10 Mar 2025 Article published 10.1186/s12911-025-02955-3

You can find further information about peer review here.

Back to article page