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 authros,
We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication following a thorough review process. The reviewers and editorial team commend the clarity, scientific rigor, and originality of your work, which makes a significant contribution to the field.
clear
Original primary research within aims and scope of the journal
Coclusions are well stated
The author has revised the masuscript
revision done
revision done
revision done
No
no comments
no comments
no comments
thank you for your response
Dear authors,
The reviewers have raised additional minor concerns. Kindly address their comments thoroughly.
Clear
Clear within Aims and Scope of the journal
Clear
Please checked the new comment in file attached
The abstract reIn the abstract, a summary of the flow of the paper's contents is clearly described.port overview has been written clearly.
In the introduction, it is better to inform the opinions of experts who support direct research in sentences.
In materials and methods section: have been clearly described
Data analysis: The analysis data still uses long sentences; it is suggested that they be shortened to be more explicit.
Conclusion: has been explained clearly
Tables: Looks clearer just have to match the format
No comment
The research question is well defined, relevant & meaningful.
Dear authors,
Thank you for your submission. The manuscript is of high relevance but would benefit from several minor revisions. In the Introduction, it is recommended to add expert opinions supporting the research. In the Materials and Methods section, the Data Analysis section could be more concise, focusing on the analyses used. Updating references with more recent sources (post-2020) would strengthen the manuscript. Additional points include clarifying the effect of smoking on gingival condition, the rationale for including smokers, addressing potential effects of medications (especially NSAIDs and HRT) on inflammation and periodontal health, and explaining the impact of participant distribution across clusters.
Reviewer 1 has also provided an annotated PDF
No comment
No comment
No comment
Please revise the manuscript, add the discussion with systemic disease hypertension and diabetic with periodontal disease based on result.
Abstract:
The result section: What is the reason for choosing a subject age under 40 years old when what is being discussed is menopause (which generally occurs at an age above 45 years old)
Introduction:
It is recommended that some expert opinions be included that support this research.
The material and methods section:
Marital stats or marital status?
Data Analysis:
It is recommended to be shorter and focus on explaining the analysis used.
Conclusion:
It would be better to remove the words "within limitations of this study" in the conclusion
In Figure 2, it is suggested that insignificant results are not displayed.
No comment
The research question well defined, relevant & meaningful. It is stated how research fills an identified knowledge gap
References are related but a bit outdated most references are before 2020,,, more references after 2020 would be recommended
No comment
No comments
-It was not clear whether smoking had any effect on the gingival condition knowing that 16 out of 112 participants were smokers.
- Why weren't the smokers excluded from the study?
- Cluster # 1 included more participants (n= 65) than cluster # 2 (25) and cluster # (22) how did this affect the study results?
- 66 participants were on recent medication 5% of which were on HRT, how about the rest any medication that can affect the degree of inflammation (NSAID/.....)?
knowing that in cluster # 2 (20 out of 25 were under medication) and 16 out of 22 in cluster # 3 were also under medication.
what kind of medication? did they have any effect on the gingival and periodontal tissues ?
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.