I uploaded all the documents and figures to the journal's submission portal, hit submit, and it went "out for review". This is a period of time during which other scientists read the manuscript and evaluate your methods, analyses, and conclusions to see if they agree with your approach and think it is worthy of publication.
Additional file 1: Supplementary methods, analyses, and results.
More specifically, these studies, sparse in number, encompass a diverse scope of methods, analyses, and applications with measurement techniques that cannot compare the impacts on the human visual system across such variety without confounds from the variety itself (i.e., information content, see more on this in the ideal observer approach to fusion evaluation section below).
To maximize the utility of data, methods, analyses, and results, information should be disseminated publicly in formats understandable by personnel of different backgrounds [12], [15], [16], [50].
As explained in the Introduction, presumably they either went completely unpublished or were somehow turned into positive through selective reporting, post-hoc re-interpretation, and alteration of methods, analyses and data.
For example, factorial and non-inferiority trials can involve more complex methods, analyses, and interpretations than parallel group superiority trials.
HMM method analyses and fits the data statistically without imposing a preconceived model (described in Materials and methods).
NB1 conceived of the study and all authors (NB1, FM, NB2) were involved in designing the methods, analyses, interpretation and drafting the manuscript.
ETN and MO worked in the conception, methods, analysing results and revising it critically.
BJJ designed the experiments, designed the oligos used in the array collected samples developed labelling and hybridisation methods, analysed the data and drafted the manuscript.
G.M., G.B., D.L. and O.L. contributed with the methods, analysed the data and supervised the experiments.
