Peer Review reports
From: A qualitative study of participants’ views on re-consent in a longitudinal biobank
| Original Submission | ||
|---|---|---|
| 20 Jun 2016 | Submitted | Original manuscript |
| 21 Sep 2016 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Kieran O'Doherty |
| 9 Oct 2016 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Jodyn Platt |
| 21 Oct 2016 | Reviewed | Reviewer Report - Merle Spriggs |
| 20 Dec 2016 | Author responded | Author comments - Mary Dixon-Woods |
| Resubmission - Version 2 | ||
| 20 Dec 2016 | Submitted | Manuscript version 2 |
| 10 Jan 2017 | Author responded | Author comments - Mary Dixon-Woods |
| Resubmission - Version 3 | ||
| 10 Jan 2017 | Submitted | Manuscript version 3 |
| 3 Feb 2017 | Author responded | Author comments - Mary Dixon-Woods |
| Resubmission - Version 4 | ||
| 3 Feb 2017 | Submitted | Manuscript version 4 |
| 23 Feb 2017 | Author responded | Author comments - Mary Dixon-Woods |
| Resubmission - Version 5 | ||
| 23 Feb 2017 | Submitted | Manuscript version 5 |
| Publishing | ||
| 27 Feb 2017 | Editorially accepted | |
| 23 Mar 2017 | Article published | 10.1186/s12910-017-0182-0 |
You can find further information about peer review here.