Challenges in identifying barriers to adoption in a theory-based implementation study: lessons for future implementation studies
© Hanbury et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 6 March 2012
Accepted: 21 November 2012
Published: 23 November 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|6 Mar 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|12 Mar 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Andria Hanbury|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|12 Mar 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|31 May 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Andria Hanbury|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|31 May 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|5 Sep 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Yvonne Forsell|
|7 Sep 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Matthew Menear|
|26 Oct 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Andria Hanbury|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|26 Oct 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|31 Oct 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Matthew Menear|
|12 Nov 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Yvonne Forsell|
|Resubmission - Version 6|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 6|
|21 Nov 2012||Editorially accepted|
|23 Nov 2012||Article published||10.1186/1472-6963-12-422|
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.