Skip to main content

Peer Review reports

From: Assessing the quality of record keeping for cesarean deliveries: results from a multicenter retrospective record review in five low-income countries

Original Submission
30 May 2013 Submitted Original manuscript
30 May 2013 Author responded Author comments - Evelyn Landry
Resubmission - Version 2
30 May 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 2
22 Jul 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Nanna Maaløe
20 Aug 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Thomas van den Akker
30 Aug 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Karlyn Frank
23 Oct 2013 Author responded Author comments - Evelyn Landry
Resubmission - Version 3
23 Oct 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 3
18 Nov 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Nanna Maaløe
22 Nov 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Karlyn Frank
5 Jan 2014 Author responded Author comments - Evelyn Landry
Resubmission - Version 4
5 Jan 2014 Submitted Manuscript version 4
5 Feb 2014 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Nanna Maaløe
27 Feb 2014 Author responded Author comments - Evelyn Landry
Resubmission - Version 5
27 Feb 2014 Submitted Manuscript version 5
2 Apr 2014 Author responded Author comments - Evelyn Landry
Resubmission - Version 6
2 Apr 2014 Submitted Manuscript version 6
2 Apr 2014 Author responded Author comments - Evelyn Landry
Resubmission - Version 7
2 Apr 2014 Submitted Manuscript version 7
Publishing
4 Apr 2014 Editorially accepted
12 Apr 2014 Article published 10.1186/1471-2393-14-139

You can find further information about peer review here.

Back to article page