Next Article in Journal
Carotid Artery Temperature Reduction with Statin Therapy in Patients with Familial Hyperlipidemia Syndromes
Next Article in Special Issue
In Vitro Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Impressions for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Prostheses
Previous Article in Journal
Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions and Their Suppression as Predictors of Peripheral Auditory Damage in Migraine: A Case-Control Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 10
Issue 21
10.3390/jcm10215006
Review Report
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

Comparing Masticatory Performance of Maxillary Mini Dental Implant Overdentures, Complete Removable Dentures and Dentate Subjects

J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(21), 5006; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10215006
by Luc Van Doorne 1,2,3,4,*, Ben De Backer 4, Carine Matthys 4, Hugo De Bruyn 4,5 and Stefan Vandeweghe 4,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
J. Clin. Med. 2021, 10(21), 5006; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10215006
Submission received: 7 October 2021 / Revised: 20 October 2021 / Accepted: 26 October 2021 / Published: 27 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Restorative Dentistry: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It is an interesting paper, however, the way of presenting at results is a bit difficult to understand for readers.

・Please add a figure or table regarding the results of VOH, because the analyses of VOH seem to be a primary analysis of the present study. 

・Regarding Figure3 and 4, the authors should add the results of DS and DP groups to consist with the hypothesis. And the authors should clearly indicate which groups were compared using statistical methods at each figure. 

・The fourth hypothesis is ambiguous.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This article entitled “Comparing masticatory performance of maxillary mini dental 2 implant overdentures, complete removable dentures and dentate subjects.” is aimed to compare objective masticatory performance of dentate groups, maxillary CRD and MDI overdentures and subjective masticatory performance in maxillary CRD and MDI overdenture.

Authors have well revised several issues; however, I ask authors to add some key concepts. Authors must discuss more on the biomechanical factors concerning peri-implant bone resorption ( see reference as Sinjari B, D'Addazio G, Traini T, et al. A 10-year retrospective comparative human study on screw-retained versus cemented dental implant abutments. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2019;33(3):787-797.) and it would also be interesting to include a part on the biomaterials used in bone regeneration that can act as scaffolds for the insertion of the implants themselves (evaluate the pros and cons of the biological mediators involved see doi: 10.1111 / clr.12423) to highlight the difficulties, not only economic, in the insertion of implants in patients with advanced maxillary resorption.

Minor issues:

Conclusions cannot be reduced to a sentence: you must improve them highlighting the limits and the future insights pointed out from this article.

Several moderate typos are present in the text, please, amend.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

There are no comments.

Back to TopTop