Peer Review reports
Original Submission | ||
---|---|---|
8 Apr 2005 | Submitted | Original manuscript |
20 Apr 2005 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Tim Stokes |
29 Apr 2005 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Suzanne Cashman |
24 May 2005 | Author responded | Author comments - Richard Neal |
Resubmission - Version 2 | ||
24 May 2005 | Submitted | Manuscript version 2 |
25 May 2005 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Tim Stokes |
31 May 2005 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Suzanne Cashman |
8 Jul 2005 | Author responded | Author comments - Richard Neal |
Resubmission - Version 3 | ||
8 Jul 2005 | Submitted | Manuscript version 3 |
8 Jul 2005 | Author responded | Author comments - Richard Neal |
Resubmission - Version 4 | ||
8 Jul 2005 | Submitted | Manuscript version 4 |
29 Jul 2005 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Suzanne Cashman |
9 Aug 2005 | Author responded | Author comments - Richard Neal |
Resubmission - Version 5 | ||
9 Aug 2005 | Submitted | Manuscript version 5 |
6 Sep 2005 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Suzanne Cashman |
Resubmission - Version 6 | ||
Submitted | Manuscript version 6 | |
Publishing | ||
7 Nov 2005 | Editorially accepted | |
7 Nov 2005 | Article published | 10.1186/1471-2296-6-47 |
You can find further information about peer review here.