This manuscript is a retrospective study based on the chart review about photobiomodulation effects in patients with BMS. The topic is interesting. Below are my raised major and minor issues.

The first and most important issue is that the purpose of the study, different from previous studies, is not clear. The second issue is insufficient inclusion and exclusion criteria for subjects. The third issue is about statistics. The multivariate analyses need to be used to control many confounding factors. The fourth issue is that there is a lack of logic in the presentation and explanation of research results.

In Abstract, In Results,
Please clarify the meaning of ‘Pain for less than one year’.
Please clarify the meaning of ‘lack of specific trigger’.
In Abstract, In conclusions
The meaning of conclusion is not clear.

In Introduction
Compared to previous PBM treatment studies, the differences (i.e., purpose of the study) of this study are not indicated.

In Materials and Methods,
In Page 6, Line 1
Please describe what were ‘all previous BMS treatments’.

The word ‘Table 2’ appears before the word ‘Table 1’ in the body of manuscript.

It is unclear whether the study subjects were primary type BMS patients. Please describe what tests were performed to exclude systematic factors.

Results
There are many missing values. Please explain the reasons of missing values.

There are many changes in the manuscript, but there are too many errors for the manuscript to be complete. It requires a lot of careful revision. Otherwise it cannot be published. Below are major issues

In Statistics
As described in the manuscript, the non-parametric method needs to be used. However, in the Tables 1 and 2, mean and SD are used. Please change whole tables into median and IQR. The whole manuscript needs to be changed accordingly.
The multivariate analysis needs to be used to control many confounding factors. The multivariate analysis will help you reach the right conclusion. And it will allow you to reduce the number of figures.

Through the whole manuscript, there are many errors in the Abbreviations. eg. In Page 7 Line 17, in the title of Table 2, in the many figures, and in many other places. These need to be corrected carefully. In the current state, it is difficult to understand the results.

In the many Figures
Please add accurately what x-axis and y-axis mean in each Figures. In each figures, please complete figure legend accurately. (not Figures 1-4,……, nor Figures 5-11)
Please remove unnecessary words in the top of figures. If the comment is necessary, please add in the figure legends. Please define the abbreviations in each figure accurately.

Below are many other issues.

In Abstract, Page 2, Line 8
Please check the definition of BMS.
In Abstract, Page 2, Line 19
Please change ‘score’ into ‘scale’.
In Abstract, Page 2, Line 33
The results do not match the body of manuscript. If the results need to be described based on the exact statistic results, not just figures. If the statistics were used, please describe how to use them in the body of manuscript.

In Introduction, Page 4, Line 26
Please add ‘years’ after 70.

In Introduction, Page 4, Line 42
Please change ‘(such as zinc and folic acid as well as hormone…’ into ‘(such as zinc and folic acid) as well as hormone…’.

In Materials and Methods,
In Page 6, Line 48
Please change ‘attacks’ into ‘episodic’. And in the Table 1.

How to classify ‘typical’ and ‘atypical’. Please explain.

Please remove ‘(see table 1)’ ‘(see table 2)’ in the Materials and Methods.

In Statistics,
Please change ‘males and females’ into ‘gender’.
Please change ‘t-tests’ into ‘proper ones’.
Please change ‘Mann Whitney Wilcoxon test’ into Mann Whitney U Test.

In Results,
In Page 8, Line 20,
The definition of IFVAS was described in Line 16 and in Line 20.
In Page 8, Line 24,
Table 1 does not show about correlations.
In Page 8, Line 33-34,
The sentence does not match the Table 1.
In Page 8, Line 40-42,
The Figure 1 does not mean IVAS and WVAS. Please correct these kinds of errors in the many places.
In Page 9, Line 33-34,
The definition of LWVAS is different here.

In Discussions
Please remove “eg. (Table 1) (Figure 6)”.

In Table 1,
Please add ‘years’ after 55.
Please explain ‘(P-A)’ and ‘(P-B)’.

There are so many errors in spelling, upper case or lower case, etc.
There are many other errors that are difficult to mention.

There are many changes in the manuscript. The manuscript is now much improved. Below are major issues

In Table 1, BMS was divided into typical and nontypical. The criteria of this classification is not described “CLEARLY” in the manuscript.

In Results,
The interpretation of Figures 1-3 needs to be described as ‘sentences’ in the body of manuscript. Please add exact P value in the sentences.

In Figures 1-3 Legends,
Please remove ‘Figure 1-3: The effect of PBM on Pain levels’.
Please remove ‘Mann Whitney Wilcoxon Test,’ in the Figure Legend.

Please describe ‘Figure legend’ in detail in each Figure. The figure legend itself should be sufficient to understand the figure. Please add explanations for abbreviation. Please do not only abbreviations.

In each Figure, please add the exact variable name, such as PVAS, in X and Y-axis. Please remove words such as, ‘vas 0’. ‘vas final’, etc. Please remove descriptions (the small size words) on the top of each figures. Please add exact P value in each Figure.

In Page 12, Line 40
Please make a space in ‘havefacilitated’.

The corrections requested were done. The manuscript is now much improved.