[PRE REVIEW]: gsMAMS: an R package for Designing Multi-Arm Multi-Stage Clinical Trials

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @Tpatni719 (Tushar Patni)
Repository: https://github.com/Tpatni719/gsMAMS.git
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: 0.7.1
Editor: @ppxasjsm
Reviewers: @njtierney, @RhysPeploe
Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/5707b5267edf860cdbb37a9f5ae2577e"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/5707b5267edf860cdbb37a9f5ae2577e/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/5707b5267edf860cdbb37a9f5ae2577e/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/5707b5267edf860cdbb37a9f5ae2577e)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @Tpatni719. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@Tpatni719 if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.18637/jss.v088.i04 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.02 s (768.2 files/s, 146449.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R                               14            738            346           1774
HTML                             1             84              5            519
Markdown                         2             29              0             92
YAML                             1              1              4             18
TeX                              1              2              0             10
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            19            854            355           2413
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1467

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

rbmi: A R package for standard and reference-based multiple imputation methods
Submitting author: @nociale
Handling editor: @fboehm (Active)
Reviewers: @DanielRivasMD, @JoranTiU
Similarity score: 0.8147

simstudy: Illuminating research methods through data generation
Submitting author: @assignUser
Handling editor: @mikldk (Retired)
Reviewers: @gagolews, @brunaw
Similarity score: 0.8106

GAMA: Genetic Automated Machine learning Assistant
Submitting author: @PGijsbers
Handling editor: @arokem (Retired)
Reviewers: @jsgalan
Similarity score: 0.8100

rsimsum: Summarise results from Monte Carlo simulation studies
Submitting author: @ellessenne
Handling editor: @leeper (Retired)
Reviewers: @lebebr01
Similarity score: 0.8094

MatSurv: Survival analysis and visualization in MATLAB
Submitting author: @jhcreed
Handling editor: @cMadan (Active)
Reviewers: @dsurujon, @ManuelaS
Similarity score: 0.8091

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot invite @ppxasjsm as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@ppxasjsm do you think you could help edit this one? I see you are handling several other submissions, but it looks like some are nearly done. If you could help, let me know if I could assign it to you and then you can get to it when you are ready. Thanks!

[ppxasjsm]

I can, but I am won't be able to start with this until end of next week.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

THANK! @ppxasjsm that is fine. I'll assign you now and you can pick it up when ready.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot assign @ppxasjsm as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @ppxasjsm is now the editor

[ppxasjsm]

@Tpatni719, I'll be the editor handling this submission. As this is not 100% area of expertise it would be great if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers. Please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

If you have any questions please just prompt me here and once we have two reviewers we can move over to the review issue.

[Tpatni719]

@ppxasjsm, Rhys Peploe, and Nicholas Tierney could be good choices to review the paper. Thank you for handling this submission.

[ppxasjsm]

hi @njtierney any chance you would be available to edit this JOSS submission?

[njtierney]

I’d be happy to review! But if you’ve me to be the editor I wouldn’t mind having another review for JOSS under my belt before I agreed to be the editor. When would you like my review by?

[ppxasjsm]

HI @njtierney I meant review...my brain was clearly not turned on. If you could get it done within the next month that would be great. I'll add you as reviewer.

[ppxasjsm]

@editorialbot add @njtierney as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@njtierney added to the reviewers list!

[ppxasjsm]

Hi @RhysPeploe, would you be interested in reviewing this JOSS submission?

[RhysPeploe]

Hi @ppxasjsm, I am busy with another JOSS submission currently. I could do this in 3/4 weeks however if that works for you

[ppxasjsm]

hi @RhysPeploe yes that will be fine. I'll make a note of it, but will start the review now.

[ppxasjsm]

@editorialbot add @RhysPeploe as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@RhysPeploe added to the reviewers list!

[ppxasjsm]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #6322.

[Tpatni719]

Hi @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman, the review of my manuscript is done and it's been two weeks since the completion of the review, so, can you please check the status of my manuscript? Thanks!