Risk factors and clinical presentation of craniocervical arterial dissection: A prospective study
© Thomas et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 4 March 2012
Accepted: 27 August 2012
Published: 3 September 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|4 Mar 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|21 Apr 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Chris Maher|
|4 Jun 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael Haneline|
|22 Jul 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Lucy Thomas|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|22 Jul 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|12 Aug 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Michael Haneline|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|27 Aug 2012||Editorially accepted|
|3 Sep 2012||Article published||10.1186/1471-2474-13-164|
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 email@example.com. 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.