The Psychological Disturbance Associated with Tooth Loss Questionnaire Revisited: Validation on a National Greek Sample

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors aim to validate and further adapt a self-reporting psychological disturbance associated with tooth loss questionnaire.

I think the work made by the autorhs is good, however I think the manuscript can be improved.
In particular, I think the organization of the manuscript could be rearranged in some parts, in order to improve its fruibility for readers.  

For example, lines 182-184, 188-194: the analysis performed could be listed in matherials and methods section.

Furthermore, in lines 158-159 the sentence "which could be attributed to the lower total number of complete denture wearers and the inclusion of partially dentate participants who retained some of their natural teeth" could be moved to the discussion section, where the authors could comment and argue regarding the results that emerged from the study.

Line 164: "don't" know should be "don't know"

In discussion section the authors could add a paragraph with the limitations of the study.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript.

We greatly appreciate the positive comments.

Lines 182-184, 188-194 were moved to the M&M section as advised. The indicated sentence in lines 158-159 was moved to the Discussion section as suggested. The indicated correction in line 164 was made. The requested paragraph with the limitations of the study was added in the Discussion section as suggested.

Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor, Dear authors

 thank you for considering me for reviewing this manuscript. The study deals with the validation of the Greek translation of the PDATL questionnaire.

In recent years, patient-centered outcomes have seen their importance grow. As the elderly population is increasing, the number of edentulous or partially edentulous patients increases too. Validated tools to assess the impact of prosthetic rehabilitations in these subjects is certainly usefull.

Two groups of patients were used in the study: one group composed of patients totally edentulous in one arch and totally or partially edentulous in the other one, the other group was included  edentulous patients in both arches. These patients were rehabilitated with partial or total removable prostheses without implants.

It would have been interesting to consider also a third group of patients, totally or partially edentulous and rehabilitated with implant-supported prostheses.

Minor issues

check and standardize the way you wrote "years". Sometimes you used the abbreviation yrs

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript.

We greatly appreciate the positive comments.

For this study we recruited patients from our undergraduate clinics, where patients are only restored with conventional removable prostheses. This is certainly an essential suggestion for a future project. The non-inclusion of this specific group of patients falls within the limitations of this study. 

The indicated edits in the word "years" were made.

Thank you.