Digital Photoelastic Analysis of TAD-Supported Maxillary Arch Distalization
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study has a good design and methodology.
In the results there are several typing errors and more generally it is difficult to analyse all the information. Perhaps the use of a more schematic model or table would make it easier for the reader to understand.
There are also several typos in the discussion. In this section I would have liked to read about the advantages of this model compared to the models already described in the literature, rather than an analysis of the biomechanics which is quite obvious. In other words, based on this sentence of the conclusions "The digital photoelastic analysis method has great potential for the evaluation of orthodontic biomechanics." I would like the authors to explain why in the discussion.
Author Response
Dear reviewer
We wish to express our strong appreciation to the reviewers for their insightful comments on our paper. We feel the comments have helped us significantly improve the paper.
1. In the results there are several typing errors and more generally it is difficult to analyse all the information. Perhaps the use of a more schematic model or table would make it easier for the reader to understand.
The reviewer's comment is correct. We have inserted the figures in each result. It will have the readers to help understand the manuscript. Thank you.
2. There are also several typos in the discussion. In this section I would have liked to read about the advantages of this model compared to the models already described in the literature, rather than an analysis of the biomechanics which is quite obvious. In other words, based on this sentence of the conclusions "The digital photoelastic analysis method has great potential for the evaluation of orthodontic biomechanics." I would like the authors to explain why in the discussion.
Thank you for your nice advice, we have inserted the features and advantages　 of the digital photoelastic method to emphasize the method in the discussion.
Also, The discussion seems redundant, so we rewrote it in a shorter form.
We have had the manuscript rewritten with the native speaker, who has improved the grammar and stylistic expression of the paper.
Again thank you for your kind effort.
Sincerely yours,
Reviewer 2 Report
Clinical Implications mentioned are very intresting. Kindly consider the following comments:
1) Grammatical errors and spelling mistakes need to be addressed. Please describe the acronyms in the manuscript (line 59 FA Facial Axis)
2) Please homologate all the References and their citation in the manuscript.
3) Line 38-39 you should better state what is not specified in other studies about maxillary dentition retraction
4) Please stress why you decide to use the new Digital Photoelastic Analisis instead of FEM
Author Response
Dear reviewer
We wish to express our strong appreciation to the reviewers for their insightful comments on our paper. We feel the comments have helped us significantly improve the paper.
1) Grammatical errors and spelling mistakes need to be addressed. Please describe the acronyms in the manuscript (line 59 FA Facial Axis)
The reviewer's comment is correct. we have had the manuscript rewritten by an experienced native person, who has improved the grammar and stylistic expression of the paper.
2) Please homologate all the References and their citation in the manuscript.
Thank you for your comment, we have checked references and citations.
3) Line 38-39 you should better state what is not specified in other studies about maxillary dentition retraction
This sentence can be misleading. We have added a word meaning limited to the photoelastic analysis.
4) Please stress why you decide to use the new Digital Photoelastic Analisis instead of FEM
Thank you for your appropriate advice, we have inserted the features and advantages　 of the digital photoelastic method to emphasize the method in the discussion.
Also, The discussion seems redundant, so we rewrote it in a shorter form.
We have had the manuscript rewritten with the native speaker, who has improved the grammar and stylistic expression of the paper.
Again thank you for your kind effort.
Sincerely yours,
