Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Peer Review Reports for: Shared decision making and antibiotic benefit-harm conversations: an observational study of consultations between general practitioners and patients with acute respiratory infections

Back to article

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

Original Submission
12 Apr 2018 Submitted Original manuscript
3 May 2018 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Akke Velinga
13 Jun 2018 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Rachel Johnson
23 Jul 2018 Author responded Author comments - Mina Bakhit
Resubmission - Version 2
23 Jul 2018 Submitted Manuscript version 2
30 Jul 2018 Author responded Author comments - Mina Bakhit
Resubmission - Version 3
30 Jul 2018 Submitted Manuscript version 3
16 Aug 2018 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Paul Van Royen
24 Aug 2018 Author responded Author comments - Mina Bakhit
Resubmission - Version 4
24 Aug 2018 Submitted Manuscript version 4
16 Sep 2018 Author responded Author comments - Mina Bakhit
Resubmission - Version 5
16 Sep 2018 Submitted Manuscript version 5
Publishing
28 Sep 2018 Editorially accepted
6 Oct 2018 Article published 10.1186/s12875-018-0854-y

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