Skip to main content

Peer Review reports

From: A look at the potential association between PICOT framing of a research question and the quality of reporting of analgesia RCTs

Original Submission
19 Jul 2012 Submitted Original manuscript
29 Aug 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Eveline Nueesch
30 Aug 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Peter Bragge
18 Dec 2012 Author responded Author comments - Lehana Thabane
Resubmission - Version 2
18 Dec 2012 Submitted Manuscript version 2
24 Mar 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Philipp Dahm
18 Apr 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Eveline Nueesch
19 Apr 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Peter Bragge
19 Jun 2013 Author responded Author comments - Lehana Thabane
Resubmission - Version 3
19 Jun 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 3
25 Jun 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Peter Bragge
11 Oct 2013 Author responded Author comments - Lehana Thabane
Resubmission - Version 4
11 Oct 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 4
3 Nov 2013 Author responded Author comments - Lehana Thabane
Resubmission - Version 5
3 Nov 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 5
Publishing
13 Nov 2013 Editorially accepted
19 Nov 2013 Article published 10.1186/1471-2253-13-44

You can find further information about peer review here.

Back to article page