Next Article in Journal
Different Lower Extremity Arterial Calcification Patterns in Patients with Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Compared with Asymptomatic Controls
Next Article in Special Issue
Leveraging Clinical Decision Support and Integrated Medical-Dental Electronic Health Records to Implementing Precision in Oral Cancer Risk Assessment and Preventive Intervention
Previous Article in Journal
Taurine Augments Telomerase Activity and Promotes Chondrogenesis in Dental Pulp Stem Cells
Previous Article in Special Issue
Robust and Accurate Mandible Segmentation on Dental CBCT Scans Affected by Metal Artifacts Using a Prior Shape Model
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Recurrent Convolutional Neural Networks for 3D Mandible Segmentation in Computed Tomography

by Bingjiang Qiu 1,2,3, Jiapan Guo 2,3,*, Joep Kraeima 1,4, Haye Hendrik Glas 1,4, Weichuan Zhang 5,6, Ronald J. H. Borra 7, Max Johannes Hendrikus Witjes 1,4 and Peter M. A. van Ooijen 2,3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Reviewer 4: Anonymous
Submission received: 3 May 2021 / Revised: 26 May 2021 / Accepted: 28 May 2021 / Published: 31 May 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic covered in this article is very interesting. It was carried out with scientific rigor and the conclusions are consistent with the results.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript „Recurrent Convolutional Neural Networks for 3D Mandible Segmentation in Computed Tomography” is very interesting and well written.

However, for the clinicians it is very hard to follow and requires a deep knowledge of the theoretical aspects of a computer tomography.

For dental and maxillofacial region, Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) is more adequate, involving less ionizing radiation exposure with good accuracy and complying with ALARA principles.

So, in my opinion, despite of the scientific value, the manuscript is not adequate, in the present form, to be published in Journal of Personalized Medicine.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a sound and useful paper that presents a novel approach for producing detailed anatomical structures in computed tomography.  as such, subject to three minor corrections, the paper merits publication more or less as submitted.

The necessary changes are:

Line 125: Replace "In contrary..." with "In contrast..."

Line 306: Not "... we presented..." but "... we present..."

Line 313: Change the verb to singular, i.e. "are" to "is".

Once these changes are made the manuscript should be accepted.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Interesting study.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors addressed the reviewers' concerns.

Back to TopTop