Reliability and group differences in quantitative cervicothoracic measures among individuals with and without chronic neck pain
© Shahidi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 11 June 2012
Accepted: 26 October 2012
Published: 31 October 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|11 Jun 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|10 Jul 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Niamh Moloney|
|20 Aug 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Karen Walker-Bone|
|28 Sep 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Bahar Shahidi|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|28 Sep 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|9 Oct 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Karen Walker-Bone|
|17 Oct 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Niamh Moloney|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|26 Oct 2012||Editorially accepted|
|31 Oct 2012||Article published||10.1186/1471-2474-13-215|
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.. 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.