Skip to main content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Total knee arthroplasties performed with a mini-incision or a standard incision. Similar results at six months follow-up

Back to article

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

Original Submission
25 Jun 2009 Submitted Original manuscript
28 Jun 2009 Author responded Author comments - Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero
Resubmission - Version 2
28 Jun 2009 Submitted Manuscript version 2
22 Jul 2009 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Gwo-Chin Lee
24 Jul 2009 Reviewed Reviewer Report - William Hamilton
22 Sep 2009 Author responded Author comments - Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero
Resubmission - Version 3
22 Sep 2009 Submitted Manuscript version 3
3 Dec 2009 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Gwo-Chin Lee
8 Dec 2009 Reviewed Reviewer Report - William Hamilton
8 Jan 2010 Author responded Author comments - Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero
Resubmission - Version 4
8 Jan 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 4
15 Jan 2010 Reviewed Reviewer Report - William Hamilton
Resubmission - Version 5
Submitted Manuscript version 5
Resubmission - Version 6
Submitted Manuscript version 6
2 Feb 2010 Author responded Author comments - Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero
Resubmission - Version 7
2 Feb 2010 Submitted Manuscript version 7
Publishing
6 Feb 2010 Editorially accepted
6 Feb 2010 Article published 10.1186/1471-2474-11-27

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