Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. Some typos and writing need to be corrected, for example:

a) Line 2: Skelatal should be Skeletal

b) Keywords: forensic dentistry; dental age

c) Line 29: (OPG)

d) Line 239: Although

e) some spacing existed

2. Are there any differences between Eastern and other regions in Turkiye? Please include a bit of explanation in the discussion part.

3. What is the purpose of determining the age of the 9-15-year group? Is there any relevance to the forensic investigation as mentioned in the conclusion?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Professional English editing should be included.

Author Response

 

1. Grammar errors and misspellings were corrected
2. Amendments explaining regional differences / variations were made in the discussion section (Lines 364-367)
3. The reason why we chose 9-15 years of age range as a basis for the study and its forensic /judicial importance was explained in the introduction section (Lines 77-87)
4. Language was revised.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is well written, focused, well-presented. It might make sense to include the geogaphical limitation in the title. The main thing I am missing is the justification, why this age frame is so important to understand in such a detail.

Some minor issues are in the file. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

 

 

1. Minor amendments were done. (Please check the annex)
2. Title was rewritten in accordance with the reviewer’s recommendation.
3. The reason why we chose 9-15 years of age range as a basis for the study was explained in the introduction section (Lines. 77-87)