Peer Review reports
From: Animal derived products may conflict with religious patients’ beliefs
| Original Submission | ||
|---|---|---|
| 22 Jul 2012 | Submitted | Original manuscript |
| 27 Jul 2012 | Author responded | Author comments - Axelina Eriksson |
| Resubmission - Version 2 | ||
| 27 Jul 2012 | Submitted | Manuscript version 2 |
| Resubmission - Version 3 | ||
| Submitted | Manuscript version 3 | |
| 10 Dec 2012 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Lorraine Corfield |
| 4 Apr 2013 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Hossein Hatami |
| 9 Apr 2013 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Daniel Cook |
| 3 Aug 2013 | Author responded | Author comments - Axelina Eriksson |
| Resubmission - Version 4 | ||
| 3 Aug 2013 | Submitted | Manuscript version 4 |
| 11 Sep 2013 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Lorraine Corfield |
| 24 Sep 2013 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Hossein Hatami |
| 24 Sep 2013 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Daniel Cook |
| 30 Oct 2013 | Author responded | Author comments - Axelina Eriksson |
| Resubmission - Version 5 | ||
| 30 Oct 2013 | Submitted | Manuscript version 5 |
| Publishing | ||
| 21 Nov 2013 | Editorially accepted | |
| 1 Dec 2013 | Article published | 10.1186/1472-6939-14-48 |
You can find further information about peer review here.