Next Article in Journal
HDR-EfficientNet: A Classification of Hypertensive and Diabetic Retinopathy Using Optimize EfficientNet Architecture
Next Article in Special Issue
Prevalence of the Bifid Mandibular Condyle and Its Relationship with Pathologies of the Temporomandibular Joint: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Implementation of Individualized Low-Dose Computed Tomography-Guided Hook Wire Localization of Pulmonary Nodules: Feasibility and Safety in the Clinical Setting
Previous Article in Special Issue
Comparisons of Dental Anomalies in Orthodontic Patients with Impacted Maxillary and Mandibular Canines
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Characteristics of Mandibular Arch Forms in Patients with Skeletal Mandibular Prognathism

Diagnostics 2023, 13(20), 3237; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13203237
by Erika Ichikawa 1,†, Chie Tachiki 1,*,†, Kunihiko Nojima 2, Satoru Matsunaga 3, Keisuke Sugahara 4, Akira Watanabe 5, Norio Kasahara 6 and Yasushi Nishii 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Diagnostics 2023, 13(20), 3237; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13203237
Submission received: 5 September 2023 / Revised: 10 October 2023 / Accepted: 16 October 2023 / Published: 17 October 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Insights into Diagnosis of Orthodontics)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors, 

you made a great work! However, some improvements are suggested before acceptance. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

 

I’ve extensively read the manuscript titled “Characteristics of Mandibular Arch Forms in Patients with 2 Skeletal Mandibular Prognathism. The aim of this study was to characterize the arch form of the mandible in skel-53 etal mandibular prognathism. The methodology is appropriate and quite linear with recent evidences/ studies on this topic. In particular, it is not easy to perform good systematic review on 3d printing in orthodontics due to the extremely high confounding variables (technology, resins etc) but the authors made a good job. I’ve not major concerns in this regard.

 

Some aspects must be addressed before considering the manuscript suitable for publication:

 

-       A revision of scientific English language is required.

-       Arch form could be significantly influenced by the presence of mandibular shift which determines asymmetry of the alveolar process on the upper arch. There are recent significant contributions in the literature about this aspect and should be cited

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29474543/

-       Also authors should address in the discussion the implication pf the above mentioned findings in the contest of their study design that has been focused on the mandibular arch

.-authors should argue about the possible distinction between the subjects included in their examination and those with mild or mixed form of class III malocclusion

-       In general, the discussion section should be improved, even considering the above mentioned topics

requires significant revision

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

the authors have successfully satisfied all my previous concerns. in my opinion, the manuscript can be published

Back to TopTop