Skip to main content


Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Voriconazole therapeutic drug monitoring: retrospective cohort study of the relationship to clinical outcomes and adverse events

  • Helen Y Chu1Email author,
  • Rupali Jain2,
  • Hu Xie3,
  • Paul Pottinger1 and
  • David N Fredricks1, 3
BMC Infectious Diseases201313:105

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-105

Received: 17 April 2012

Accepted: 19 February 2013

Published: 26 February 2013

Back to article

Open Peer Review reports

Pre-publication versions of this article and author comments to reviewers are available by contacting

Original Submission
17 Apr 2012 Submitted Original manuscript
Resubmission - Version 2
Submitted Manuscript version 2
24 Jul 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Emmanuel Roilides
12 Oct 2012 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Georgios Petrikkos
18 Jan 2013 Author responded Author comments - Helen Chu
Resubmission - Version 3
18 Jan 2013 Submitted Manuscript version 3
9 Feb 2013 Reviewed Reviewer Report - Emmanuel Roilides
Resubmission - Version 4
Submitted Manuscript version 4
19 Feb 2013 Editorially accepted
26 Feb 2013 Article published 10.1186/1471-2334-13-105

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 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.

Authors’ Affiliations

Division of Allergy & Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Washington
Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington Medical Center
Vaccine and Infectious Diseases Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center