The Effect of Three Polishing Systems on the Surface Rugosity of One Composite Resin

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Good

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

A: Good

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very Good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Good

Comments: The Discussion provides an overview of the in vitro study undertaken to understand the effect of the polishing system on surface rugosity. It also discusses the dependence of interaction between restoring material and polishing systems on the quality of finishing and polishing. The Discussion also highlights the limitations of the study. Lastly, the conclusion states that the lowest surface rugosity of the composite resin was identified after polishing with a multistep system.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments: There are few issues found in the manuscript which are as follows:

·       Under subheading Surface rugosity, 1^st sentence, “Afterwards, the specimens were submitted to analysis…” is rewritten as “Afterward, the specimens were submitted for analysis…”.

·       Under Conclusion, 2^nd sentence, “Considering the limitations of the in vitro study, it is suggested that clinical studies be prepared for further comparison” must be written as  “Considering the limitations of the in vitro study, it is suggested that clinical studies can be prepared for further comparison”.

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This manuscript aimed to verify the effect and performance of three different polishing systems over the surface rugosity of a nanoparticulated composite resin, considering the multi-step systems. This further illustrates the materials and methods involved in the in vitro study, including the preparation of the specimen, surface rugosity and also provides the statistical analysis of the results achieved. 

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team