All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
Dear authors thank you for submitting your manuscript to this prestigious journal.
The article according to the reviewers' assessment is now ready to be accepted.
Best regards
No comment
No comment
No comment
The revisions are to my satisfaction. The manuscript can be accepted for publication
No comment
No comment
No comment
Dear authors thank you for submitting the revised version of your manuscript.
I will suggest the editor to accept it in current form
Best regards
Dear authors,
Please follow the reviewers' instructions.
Best regards
[# PeerJ Staff Note: Please ensure that all review and editorial comments are addressed in a response letter and any edits or clarifications mentioned in the letter are also inserted into the revised manuscript where appropriate. It is a common mistake to address reviewer questions in the response letter but not in the revised manuscript. If a reviewer raised a question then your readers will probably have the same question so you should ensure that the manuscript can stand alone without the response letter. Directions on how to prepare a response letter can be found at: https://peerj.com/benefits/academic-rebuttal-letters/ #]
[# PeerJ Staff Note: The review process has identified that the English language must be improved. PeerJ can provide language editing services - please contact us at copyediting@peerj.com for pricing (be sure to provide your manuscript number and title) #]
No comment
No comment
No comment
Dear Author,
A comprehensive qualitative and quantitative analysis. The manuscript is well-drafted.
Only minor revisions/queries need to be addressed:
1) Was the review registered in any databases like PROSPERO. The importance of such registration is that it allows you to declare to the reviewers and the editor that the review protocol has been screened by PROSPERO and either there are no similar reviews or a justification is provided for the current review. Thus, I request the authors to register in PROSPERO and provide the registeration number
2) PubMed/Medline- Here PubMed included both Medline and PubMed central right? Then why mention as slash Medline?
3) Scopus database?
4) Have u included a supplementary file summarizing the search strategy employed in each database and have enlisted the articles excluded in full text assessment and the reason for exclusion?
5) Keywords and other free terms- Here what is the difference between keywords and other free terms?
Kindly address the above comments.
English Language should be revised.
References are well presented.
The experimental design of the manuscript Is ok, aim are clear and method are well described.
See General Comments
Dear Authors,
Thank you for submitting your article to this prestigious journal.
The manuscript is well presented but it presents some issues:
Abstract: Abstract should be revised, rewritten and make it more fluent and appealing.
Keywords: To ensure a properly research in medical databases, use MeSH terms to find appealing keywords that could be helpful in finding your article.
From Line 93 to 98… I would like to propose the authors to insert the chemical formula of lidocaine and articaine as a figure to ensure a proper comprehension for the readers.
Moreover could you please describe the pharmacodynamics?
Figures are well presented.
Table 2: if it is possible make it more clear. It is too confusing.
Methods and Results are ok.
From Line 346 to 349… Please be more specific in describing the neurological patterns. Where the pain impulse is distributed in the central nervous system? What are the areas of the cortex included in the pain storage?
Discussion should be revised.
Conclusion must be entirely revised making it more appealing.
English spell revision is necessary.
Best Regards.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.