Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35815903›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cosmetic science2022

A comparison between silicone-free and silicone-based emulsions: Technological features and in vivo evaluation.

Antonia Mancuso, Martine Tarsitano, Betty P Udongo, Maria Chiara Cristiano, Daniele Torella, Donatella Paolino, Massimo Fresta

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cosmetic science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Patient-Centric Design of Topical Dermatological Medicines.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Antonia MancusoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Catanzaro, Italy.
Martine TarsitanoDepartment of Health Science University "Magna Graecia" of Catanzaro Campus Universitario-Germaneto, Catanzaro, Italy.
Betty P UdongoPincer Training and Research Institute, Kampala, Uganda.
Maria Chiara CristianoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Catanzaro, Italy.
Daniele TorellaDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Catanzaro, Italy.
Donatella PaolinoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5223-9879
Massimo FrestaDepartment of Health Science University "Magna Graecia" of Catanzaro Campus Universitario-Germaneto, Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8062-817X
Magna Graecia University · ITUganda Cancer Institute · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveNowadays, the use of silicones in cosmetic formulation is still controversial, given that "natural" or "biodegradable" components are preferred. Often, the exclusion and/or the discrimination of these excipients from cosmetic field are unmotivated because all things cannot be painted with the same brush. Hence, we want to bring to light and underline the advantages of including silicones in cosmetic emulsions, refuting and debunking some myths related to their use.

methodsSilicone-free and silicone-based emulsions were obtained within an easy homogenization process. Droplet size distribution was assessed by laser diffraction particle size analyser Mastersizer 2000™, and by optical microscopy. The long-time stability profiles were investigated thanks to the optical analyser Turbiscan® Lab Expert. Diffusing wave spectroscopy (DWS) by Rheolaser Master™ and frequency sweep measurements by Kinexus® Pro Rotational Rheometer were carried out to assess a full rheological characterization. In vivo studies were carried out by the evaluation of Trans Epidermal Water Loss (TEWL) over time on healthy human volunteers. A skin feeling rating was collected from the same volunteers by questionnaire.

resultsFrom size distribution analysis, a better coherence of data appeared for silicone-based emulsion, as the size of the droplets was kept unchanged after 1 month, as well as the uniformity parameter. Morphological investigation confirmed a homogenous droplet distribution for both samples. Silicones enhanced the viscosity, compactness and strength of the cream, providing a suitable stability profile both at room temperature and when heated at 40°C. The solid-like viscoelastic behaviour was assessed in the presence of dynamic oscillatory stresses. The monitoring of TEWL over time demonstrated non-occlusive properties of emulsions containing silicones, the values of which were comparable to the negative control. Silicone-based emulsions gained higher scores from the volunteers in silkiness, freshness and softness features, while lower scores were obtained in greasiness compared to silicone-free emulsions. No cases of irritation were recorded by the candidates.

conclusionThe presence of specific silicones inside a cosmetic product improved its technological characteristics. The rheological identity and the stability feature showed the real suitability of prepared emulsion as a cosmetic product. Moreover, this study demonstrated that silicone-based emulsions are safe for the skin and did not cause skin occlusion. Improved skin sensations are registered by potential consumers when silicones are included in the formulation.

Indexed as

CosmeticsSiliconesEmulsionsHumansRheologySkinWaterCosmeticsEmulsionsSiliconesWatercosmetic emulsionsemulsion rheologyemulsion stabilityin vivo safety testingsiliconesskin feeling

Identifiers

PMID35815903
PMCPMC9545630
OpenAlexW4285030240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.