Skip to main content

Advertisement

Peer Review reports

From: Determining correspondences between high-frequency MedDRA concepts and SNOMED: a case study

Original Submission
20 Nov 2009 Submitted Original manuscript
Resubmission - Version 2
Submitted Manuscript version 2
20 Nov 2009 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 3
20 Nov 2009 Submitted Manuscript version 3
1 Dec 2009 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 4
1 Dec 2009 Submitted Manuscript version 4
18 Jan 2010 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Rachel Richesson
6 Feb 2010 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Olivier Bodenreider
20 Feb 2010 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Alan Rector
28 Feb 2010 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 5
28 Feb 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 5
20 Apr 2010 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Olivier Bodenreider
10 Aug 2010 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 6
10 Aug 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 6
1 Sep 2010 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Olivier Bodenreider
7 Sep 2010 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 7
7 Sep 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 7
20 Sep 2010 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 8
20 Sep 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 8
Resubmission - Version 9
Submitted Manuscript version 9
21 Sep 2010 Author responded Author comments - Prakash Nadkarni
Resubmission - Version 10
21 Sep 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 10
Publishing
28 Oct 2010 Editorially accepted
28 Oct 2010 Article published 10.1186/1472-6947-10-66

You can find further information about peer review here.

Back to article page