This article has Open Peer Review reports available.
A comparative study of two various models of organising diabetes follow-up in public primary health care – the model influences the use of services, their quality and costs
© Honkasalo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014
Received: 22 August 2013
Accepted: 16 January 2014
Published: 20 January 2014
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|22 Aug 2013||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|15 Oct 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - James Dunbar|
|4 Nov 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Cynthia Porter|
|7 Dec 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Mikko Honkasalo|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|7 Dec 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|5 Jan 2014||Author responded||Author comments - Mikko Honkasalo|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|5 Jan 2014||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|16 Jan 2014||Editorially accepted|
|20 Jan 2014||Article published||10.1186/1472-6963-14-26|
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 firstname.lastname@example.org. 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.