Implications of the licensure of a partially efficacious malaria vaccine on evaluating second-generation vaccines
© Fowkes et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013
Received: 21 June 2013
Accepted: 19 September 2013
Published: 30 October 2013
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org.
|21 Jun 2013||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|19 Jul 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Philip Bejon|
|1 Aug 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Joe Cohen|
|3 Aug 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Thomas Richie|
|22 Aug 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Freya Fowkes|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|22 Aug 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|31 Aug 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Thomas Richie|
|2 Sep 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Philip Bejon|
|18 Sep 2013||Author responded||Author comments - Freya Fowkes|
|Resubmission - Version 4|
|18 Sep 2013||Submitted||Manuscript version 4|
|19 Sep 2013||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Philip Bejon|
|Resubmission - Version 5|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 5|
|19 Sep 2013||Editorially accepted|
|30 Oct 2013||Article published||10.1186/1741-7015-11-232|
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 email@example.com. 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.