Dear Editor, Thank you for offering me the opportunity to review this manuscript. Unfortunately, some flaws were found in the present research paper started with the (abstract) and it is better to reformulate the abstract to be more familiar with the article goals

Objectives: to evaluate the effect of finger smearing, smoothing of an alginate impression material with complete isolation of the oral cavity during taking the impression on the quality and accuracy of the poured master casts.

Materials and methods: Twenty of mandibular alginate impressions of dentate patients (10 males, and 10 females) were taken with an age range from (20-40) years , then divided into two groups: Group 1: alginate impression was taken with finger smearing and smoothing the occlusal surface of the posterior teeth with complete isolation of the oral cavity (free from salivary contamination). Group 2: alginate impression was taken without finger smearing or smoothing and wet oral cavity with the saliva. The surface defects (nodules/ blebs) on the occlusal surface of the poured casts were examined under a digital microscope, then classified according to the number and size of the defects into the following: Type (A) nodules ˂ 500 µm in diameter, Type (B) nodules range from 500 -1000 µm in diameter, Type (C) nodules ˃ 1000 µm in diameter.The data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukeyʼs test.

Results: Significant differences in the mean values (p ˂ 0.01) of the defects in both groups(1, 2) were observed. All types of defects ( A,B, and C) of group 2 were significantly higher than in group 1.

Conclusion: Use of finger smearing, smoothing of alginate impression materials during taking the impression with optimal saliva isolation is of an important clinically to reduce the possibility of nodules / blebs formation on the occlusal surface of the poured stone casts.

Title: it is better to change the name of the title into: "The effect of alginate preparation during taking impression on the surface accuracy of the dental cast"

References: Relevant, Recent, Referenced correctly

Introduction

The author(s) in the introduction have to be list the effect of tray selection and some cases those were need some modification within the tray to obtain a successful impression with less deformity. The use of adhesives that over come displaying forces during withdrawal of the impression from the patient mouth. Author can review the most appropriate methods of preparation of alginate impression to gain the more accurate dental cast and make a comparison between them.

Materials and Methods

First of all, the method was duplicated from other researches and used the same procedure for the preparation of alginate impression and has no novel information, the author depending on an equation without mention the reference that support the parameter.

Results:

Re-write this statement to be : The mean and standared deviations for all groups are shown in Table 1 . Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) showed that the defects in µm significantly in group 2 (p ˂0.001) higher than that in group 1.

For Tukey’s Post Hoc test , it is better to explain the level of significance between groups rather than to show if there is a significant differences or not?!!

What about independent T-test to compare the analyzed data between group 1 and group 2 ?!

The author was mention in the last paragraph, that (Type A) defects in group 2 (Mean 367.18) lesser than that of the (Type A) defect in group 1 (Mean 362.43) in Table 1, but the data appear to be opposite to this explanation in Table 1 , why?

Discussion:

In the paragraph five ( The defects ............) within the discussion, the author claims that in the test group (group 2), Type-A defects were higher as compared to control group (group 1)!! This is not agree what did he say in the result explanation and in Fig. 5 ?!. He should re-write the statement according to the actual results findings.

Also the author does not explain the criteria if the dental cast according to the type of defects (A,B,C) after pouring can be used scientifically or practically for the next dental procedures depending on the classified defects?!