Skip to main content

Peer Review reports

From: Reduction in resource use with the misoprostol vaginal insert vs the dinoprostone vaginal insert for labour induction: a model-based analysis from a United Kingdom healthcare perspective

Original Submission
13 Feb 2015 Submitted Original manuscript
Author responded Author comments
Reviewed Reviewer Report
Reviewed Reviewer Report
Resubmission - Version 2
Submitted Manuscript version 2
Author responded Author comments
Reviewed Reviewer Report
Reviewed Reviewer Report
Resubmission - Version 3
Submitted Manuscript version 3
Publishing
22 Jan 2016 Editorially accepted
10 Feb 2016 Article published 10.1186/s12913-016-1278-9

You can find further information about peer review here.

Back to article page