Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Second opinion for degenerative spinal conditions: an option or a necessity? A prospective observational study

Back to article

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

Original Submission
6 May 2016 Submitted Original manuscript
28 Jul 2016 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Paul Willems
21 Dec 2016 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Emily Lindley
1 Jan 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Michael J. Lee
27 Jan 2017 Author responded Author comments - Mario Lenza
Resubmission - Version 2
27 Jan 2017 Submitted Manuscript version 2
11 Apr 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Emily Lindley
3 Jul 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Sabrina Donzelli
23 Jul 2017 Author responded Author comments - Mario Lenza
Resubmission - Version 3
23 Jul 2017 Submitted Manuscript version 3
3 Aug 2017 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Sabrina Donzelli
6 Aug 2017 Author responded Author comments - Mario Lenza
Resubmission - Version 4
6 Aug 2017 Submitted Manuscript version 4
Publishing
8 Aug 2017 Editorially accepted
17 Aug 2017 Article published 10.1186/s12891-017-1712-0

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