Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41441162›Full record

ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Comparative Evaluation of Spreadability Measurement Methods for Topical Semisolid Formulations/A Scoping Review.

Elham Y Al-Barghouthy, Saja Hamed, Ghadeer F Mehyar, Hatim S AlKhatib

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  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

4 authors.

Elham Y Al-BarghouthyDepartment of Pharmaceutics & Pharmaceutical Technology, School of Pharmacy, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan.ORCID 0009-0003-7896-0925
Saja HamedDepartment of Pharmaceutics & Pharmaceutical Technology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The Hashemite University, Zarqa 13133, Jordan.ORCID 0000-0001-5908-5676
Ghadeer F MehyarDepartment of Nutrition and Food Technology, The University of Jordan, Queen Rania Street, Amman 11942, Jordan.ORCID 0000-0002-8401-3452
Hatim S AlKhatibDepartment of Pharmaceutics & Pharmaceutical Technology, School of Pharmacy, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpreadability is a critical performance attribute for semisolid formulations, influencing patient compliance, dose uniformity, and product acceptability. Despite its importance, there is no standardized method for its assessment across pharmaceutical and cosmetic applications.

objectiveThis review uniquely integrates systematic literature mapping with an experimental comparison of five spreadability assessment techniques, providing evidence-based recommendations for harmonizing protocols and improving reproducibility in semisolid formulation testing.

methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science identified 211 records, of which 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Techniques reviewed included parallel-plate, slip-and-drag, rheometry (flow curve and amplitude sweep), texture analysis, and frictiometry. An experimental comparison was conducted on ten commercial formulations using all five techniques to assess inter-method variability and formulation-dependent behavior.

resultsTexture analyzer and amplitude sweep rheometry emerged as the most reproducible and predictive methods, showing strong correlation (r = 0.74) in both literature and experimental data. Flow curve yield stress negatively correlated with parallel-plate spreadability (r = -0.796). Frictiometry results varied significantly with formulation type, particularly for ointments. Creams consistently ranked highest in spreadability across methods.

conclusionNo single method universally captures spreadability. Amplitude sweep rheometry correlated well with texture analysis, while flow curve values were more variable. Parallel-plate testing showed strong agreement with rheological and tribological methods, though texture analysis diverged, capturing distinct mechanical attributes. A tiered approach integrating parallel-plate, amplitude sweep, and frictiometry is recommended, with flow curve retained for regulatory compliance. Texture analysis provides valuable orthogonal information. Standardization of parallel-plate protocols is needed to establish unified spreadability indices.

Indexed as

frictiometerrheologysemisolid formulationsspreadabilitystandardizationstress yieldtexture analyzertribology

Identifiers

PMID41441162
PMCPMC12732428

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.