Current challenges and future directions for naturopathic medicine in Australia: a qualitative examination of perceptions and experiences from grassroots practice
© Wardle et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 10 August 2012
Accepted: 8 January 2013
Published: 14 January 2013
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|10 Aug 2012||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|13 Aug 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Jon Wardle|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|13 Aug 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|1 Oct 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Pauline McCabe|
|29 Oct 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Carlo Calabrese|
|3 Dec 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Jon Wardle|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|3 Dec 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|11 Dec 2012||Author responded||Author comments - Jon Wardle|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|11 Dec 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|8 Jan 2013||Editorially accepted|
|14 Jan 2013||Article published||10.1186/1472-6882-13-15|
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 and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org. All previous versions of the manuscript and all author responses to the reviewers are also available.
You can find further information about the peer review system here.