Skip to main content

Peer Review reports

From: “Comparing the effectiveness, acceptability and oral hygiene status between vacuum formed retainer and Begg’s retainer”: a pilot study

Original Submission
30 Nov 2022 Submitted Original manuscript
Resubmission - Version 2
Submitted Manuscript version 2
Resubmission - Version 3
Submitted Manuscript version 3
8 Jan 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report
14 Jan 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Mahmoud Ahmed Elhadad
17 Jan 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Annick Bruwier
7 Feb 2023 Author responded Author comments - sumita mishra
Resubmission - Version 4
7 Feb 2023 Submitted Manuscript version 4
9 Feb 2023 Author responded Author comments - sumita mishra
Resubmission - Version 5
9 Feb 2023 Submitted Manuscript version 5
16 Feb 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report
21 Feb 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Annick Bruwier
11 Mar 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Mahmoud Ahmed Elhadad
3 Apr 2023 Author responded Author comments - sumita mishra
Resubmission - Version 6
3 Apr 2023 Submitted Manuscript version 6
4 Apr 2023 Author responded Author comments - sumita mishra
Resubmission - Version 7
4 Apr 2023 Submitted Manuscript version 7
16 Apr 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report
18 Apr 2023 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Annick Bruwier
27 Apr 2023 Author responded Author comments - sumita mishra
Resubmission - Version 8
27 Apr 2023 Submitted Manuscript version 8
27 Apr 2023 Author responded Author comments - sumita mishra
Resubmission - Version 9
27 Apr 2023 Submitted Manuscript version 9
Publishing
3 May 2023 Editorially accepted
9 May 2023 Article published 10.1186/s12903-023-03010-1

You can find further information about peer review here.

Back to article page