Submited on: 18 Dec 2011 04:08:11 PM GMT
Published on: 19 Dec 2011 03:40:54 PM GMT
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:
    This original article throws light assessment of Variables in Mesioangular Impactions and Vertically Erupted Mandibular Third
    Molars among Indian population
     

    Illustrations:

    Comparison of tracings of impacted and erupted 3rd molars on original radiographs would have been more illustrative and explainatory.


    Corrections suggested in the manuscript:

    Introduction:

    Page no. 2: 2nd line: Mandibular third molars are the most frequently impacted teeth after the maxillary third molars1and third molars account for 98% of all impacted teeth1.  

    unclear ??????

    Results

    Page no. 3: The mean age of the patients in both the groups ranged from 18-25 years. Among the different parameters assessed the inclination of third molar, angle between the third molar and the base of the mandible ,the gonial angle, mesiodistal width differed significantly between the impacted and the erupted groups but there was not much significant difference in the retromolar space between the two groups (illustration -1).

    Sentences unclear?

    Page no.3: The mean value of third molar angulation was 44.06 (SD± 11.2) in the impacted group and in erupted groups the mean was 25.29 (SD ±14.59) the difference was statistically significant.

    Discussion:

    Page no 3: 10th line: Furthermore the mesiodistal crown width was significant high among males than in females in the impacted group.-

    Suggested correction: Furthermore the mesiodistal crown width was significantly high among males than in females in the impacted group

    Page no. 4: From their follow up study it was concluded that mesially inclined or horizontally placed lower third molars with angulation ? 350 will not erupt to the level of occlusal plane.

     unclear ?????

    Page no. 4: therefore they concluded that if the periodontal probing depth is ?4mm distal to second molar or around the impacted third molar, it has to be surgically removed as it is impractical to wait for the impacted to erupt to the occlusal plane which leads to worsening of periodontal prognosis and may not be restored back to normal. The prudent decision warranting removal holds true for mesially / horizontally impacted teeth with angulation ? 350 as they are unlikelyto erupt & distoangular impacted or vertically erupted teeth with periodontal probing depth is ?4mm.

    Unclear??????

    Referencing in the body of manuscript: especially in the discussion- superscript of reference numbers not done

  • Competing interests:
    no
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    good

  • How to cite:  Shah B .Assessment of Variables in Mesioangular Impactions and Vertically Erupted Mandibular Third Molars[Review of the article 'Assessment of Variables in Mesioangular Impactions and Vertically Erupted Mandibular Third Molars ' by Naikmasur V].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001298
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    This is original contribution to the scientific knowledge which clears the the features of Indian population.

     

    In Illustration 2, inclination of third molar should be corrected as 44.06 (SD± 11.2) in inpacted group.

     

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Yes

  • How to cite:  Aribas B .Assessment of Variables in Mesioangular Impactions and Vertically Erupted Mandibular Third Molars[Review of the article 'Assessment of Variables in Mesioangular Impactions and Vertically Erupted Mandibular Third Molars ' by Naikmasur V].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001286
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse