Current Trends on Unique Features and Role of Nanomaterials in Personal Care Products
, Praveena S. Rajapakshe 1,2, Awanthi De Silva 3, Randika A. Jayasinghe 4, Renuka N. Liyanage 1, Nadeeka D. Tissera 5, Ruchira N. Wijesena 5 and Gayan Priyadarshana 1,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is a review of the use of nanomaterials in the cosmetic industry, which is always helpful when seeking information on a topic. However, all the information is consolidated in section 4, resembling a list of various nanomaterials without any connection between them. There are some cases that appear isolated in different parts of the review. For the review to be useful to the scientific community, it should be organized by specific topics, types of nanomaterials, or their characteristics.
On the other hand, the bibliography is outdated, as very few articles are from the last five years, not reaching the 50% that is typically recommended for reviews.
The review requires a complete rewrite, organizing the various sections in a way that makes it easier to obtain information, and updating the references
Author Response
Comment 01 - This is a review of the use of nanomaterials in the cosmetic industry, which is always helpful when seeking information on a topic. However, all the information is consolidated in section 4, resembling a list of various nanomaterials without any connection between them. There are some cases that appear isolated in different parts of the review. For the review to be useful to the scientific community, it should be organized by specific topics, types of nanomaterials, or their characteristics.
Response 01 - Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore we have rearranged under specific topics according to the various nanomaterials. These changes can be found on pages numbers 6 - 19 highlighting the changes. Also, they are organized according to those sub-topics. This comment helped organize our article properly. Also, changes are marked in the submitted revised paper here.
Comments 02 - On the other hand, the bibliography is outdated, as very few articles are from the last five years, not reaching the 50% that is typically recommended for reviews.
Response 02 - Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore we have tried to add new articles recently published according to content changes.
Comment 03 - The review requires a complete rewrite, organizing the various sections in a way that makes it easier to obtain information, and updating the references.
Responses 03 - Thank you for the overall suggestions on our article. We are truly trying to figure out the article organized according to your suggestions. Please find the detailed responses below the attached article and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted in the re-submitted files
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript is a timely review about the use of nanotechnology in cosmetic industry. The review is exhaustive, well written and interesting.
In my opinion it can be published on Cosmetics after minor revision See below:
- The authors report several examples of nanomaterials used for cosmetic purposes ranging from nanoemulsions to carbon based nanomaterials, however they did not mention clay minerals. These are known since ancient time as personal care products I suggest the authors to add a paragraph about these materials.
- There are some papers that should be mentioned, see for example: Applied Clay Science, 2024, 255, 107422, Molecules, 2021, 26(15), 4392, Clays and Clay Minerals, 2021, 69(5), pp. 561–575.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish is fine
Author Response
Comments 01 - The authors report several examples of nanomaterials used for cosmetic purposes ranging - from nanoemulsions to carbon based nanomaterials, however they did not mention clay minerals. These are known since ancient time as personal care products I suggest the authors to add a paragraph about these materials.
Response 01 - Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We agree with the feedback provided. Therefore we add some review on clay minerals in our article on page number 10 highlighting the changes. Again we would like to thank you for bringing this important missing part to our attention.
Comments 02 - There are some papers that should be mentioned, see for example: Applied Clay Science, 2024, 255, 107422, Molecules, 2021, 26(15), 4392, Clays and Clay Minerals, 2021, 69(5), pp. 561–575.
Response 02 - Thank you again for figuring this out for our attention. We have referred to these articles and rearranged our article with additional details of these articles. Please find the detailed responses below the attached article and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted in the re-submitted files
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe new order and organization of the text is now better. However, there are some mistakes in the references.
In line 309 references 63 and 64 are not in the correct order. They should be 49 and 50 and then change the next references accordingly. Similar with references 116, 117 and 118 in lines 450 to 456
Author Response
Comments 01 - In line 309 references 63 and 64 are not in the correct order. They should be 49 and 50 and then change the next references accordingly. Similar with references 116, 117 and 118 in lines 450 to 456.
Response 01 - Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore we have rearranged citations and references according to the correct order. These changes can be found on pages numbers 7 and 10 highlighting the changes. This comment helped organize our article properly. Also, changes are marked in the submitted revised paper here. Thanks again for your great attention to our paper.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
