Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: An evaluation of the content and quality of tinnitus information on websites preferred by General Practitioners

Back to article

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

Original Submission
27 Jan 2012 Submitted Original manuscript
26 Feb 2012 Author responded Author comments - Derek Hoare
Resubmission - Version 2
26 Feb 2012 Submitted Manuscript version 2
28 Feb 2012 Author responded Author comments - Derek Hoare
Resubmission - Version 3
28 Feb 2012 Submitted Manuscript version 3
24 Mar 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Grant Searchfield
21 Apr 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Samuel Atcherson
22 Apr 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - NIGEL PADGHAM
24 Apr 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Stella Forti
25 Apr 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - rich tyler
26 Apr 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Pauline Smith
19 Jun 2012 Author responded Author comments - Derek Hoare
Resubmission - Version 4
19 Jun 2012 Submitted Manuscript version 4
Publishing
23 Jun 2012 Editorially accepted
12 Jul 2012 Article published 10.1186/1472-6947-12-70

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