Review History
Estimation of serum C-reactive protein activity in periodontal health and disease and response to treatment: a clinico-biochemical study

Dear authors, thank you for completing the requested revisions. I am happy to let you know that your manuscript has been accepted for publication in PeerJ.

[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Gwyn Gould, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]

Dear authors, It is crucial to ensure the quality and validity of the research presented in your paper, and I would like to request your attention to the following issues:

Statistical Analysis: I have reservations regarding the explanation of how you conducted the statistical analysis. Before performing a t-test, it is advisable to assess normality using tests like the Shapiro-Wilk or Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests to check if the data in each group follows a normal distribution. If the data in one or both groups significantly deviates from a normal distribution, it may be necessary to consider non-parametric tests, such as the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U test, instead of a t-test. In summary, please check for normality in each group. If both groups follow a normal distribution and have approximately equal variances, you can proceed with an unpaired t-test. If normality is not met or variances differ significantly, consider using non-parametric tests or other appropriate statistical methods. - these should be however clear in your work description!

Diagnosis Method: It appears that there is a missing description of how the diagnosis was performed in your manuscript. It would be valuable to include figures or data related to the diagnostic process, whether it involves biochemistry or pathology. This additional information will enhance the clarity and comprehensibility of your work.

P-Values: I also noticed that p-values of 0.000 were reported in Tables 2 and 3. I have concerns about the accuracy of these values, as it is more likely that they are simply lower than the program's display threshold. It is essential to clarify this point to ensure the correctness of your statistical reporting.

I believe it is crucial to address these issues to enhance the quality and validity of your research before it is accepted for publication.

I look forward to your response and the necessary revisions to address these concerns.

**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please note that this revision has only been reviewed by the Academic Editor at this point. Once you have addressed their comments, it might still need to be sent out for peer review.

**PeerJ Staff Note:** Please ensure that all review, editorial, and staff 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.

Thanks for your submission. Please address the following queries-

1. It needs to be mentioned what type of study design was used.

2. How the sample size was determined? How did you allocate an equal number of participants to each group?

3. What are the inclusion criteria for selecting a participant in this study?

4. There is not much information of key variables in the study.

5. What type of analyses were performed? Which statistical software was used?

6. Did you assess the normality? No information on normality checking and you performed t- test. Needed clarification.

[# PeerJ Staff Note: The review process has identified that the English language should 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) #]