Skip to main content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Agreement between diagnoses reached by clinical examination and available reference standards: a prospective study of 216 patients with lumbopelvic pain

Back to article

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

Original Submission
9 Dec 2004 Submitted Original manuscript
11 Jan 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Jonathan Hill
15 Feb 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Elaine Thomas
10 Mar 2005 Author responded Author comments - Mark Laslett
Resubmission - Version 2
10 Mar 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 2
24 Mar 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Jonathan Hill
24 Mar 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Elaine Thomas
5 Apr 2005 Author responded Author comments - Mark Laslett
Resubmission - Version 3
5 Apr 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 3
19 Apr 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Jonathan Hill
22 Apr 2005 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Elaine Thomas
Resubmission - Version 4
Submitted Manuscript version 4
20 May 2005 Author responded Author comments - Mark Laslett
Resubmission - Version 5
20 May 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 5
1 Jun 2005 Author responded Author comments - Mark Laslett
Resubmission - Version 6
1 Jun 2005 Submitted Manuscript version 6
Publishing
9 Jun 2005 Editorially accepted
9 Jun 2005 Article published 10.1186/1471-2474-6-28

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