Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Evidence-based health information from the users’ perspective – a qualitative analysis

Back to article

Pre-publication versions of this article are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

Original Submission
30 Jan 2013 Submitted Original manuscript
31 Jan 2013 Author responded Author comments - Irene Hirschberg
Resubmission - Version 2
31 Jan 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 2
1 Feb 2013 Author responded Author comments - Irene Hirschberg
Resubmission - Version 3
1 Feb 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 3
26 Mar 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Zachary Munn
30 Apr 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Kate Hinds
23 Sep 2013 Author responded Author comments - Irene Hirschberg
Resubmission - Version 4
23 Sep 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 4
24 Sep 2013 Author responded Author comments - Irene Hirschberg
Resubmission - Version 5
24 Sep 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 5
27 Sep 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Zachary Munn
30 Sep 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Kate Hinds
7 Oct 2013 Author responded Author comments - Irene Hirschberg
Resubmission - Version 6
7 Oct 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 6
Resubmission - Version 7
Submitted Manuscript version 7
8 Oct 2013 Author responded Author comments - Irene Hirschberg
Resubmission - Version 8
8 Oct 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 8
Publishing
8 Oct 2013 Editorially accepted
10 Oct 2013 Article published 10.1186/1472-6963-13-405

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 are available by contacting info@biomedcentral.com.

You can find further information about the peer review system here.

Advertisement