A 4-week, dose-ranging study comparing the efficacy, safety and tolerability of latanoprost 75, 100 and 125 μg/mL to latanoprost 50 μg/mL (xalatan) in the treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension
© Eveleth et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
Received: 14 September 2011
Accepted: 18 May 2012
Published: 18 May 2012
Open Peer Review reports
Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting email@example.com.
|14 Sep 2011||Submitted||Original manuscript|
|6 Nov 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Teresa Rolle|
|8 Nov 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Randy Craven|
|14 Nov 2011||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Marcelo Hatanaka|
|31 Jan 2012||Author responded||Author comments - David Eveleth|
|Resubmission - Version 2|
|31 Jan 2012||Submitted||Manuscript version 2|
|12 Feb 2012||Reviewed||Reviewer Report - Teresa Rolle|
|Resubmission - Version 3|
|Submitted||Manuscript version 3|
|18 May 2012||Editorially accepted|
|18 May 2012||Article published||10.1186/1471-2415-12-9|
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.