EVALUATION OF MULTIFUNCTIONALITY IN COSMETICS

In recent years, developments in the field of cosmetic ingredients especially use of natural sources and carriers systems and the manufacturing methods resulted as an improvement in the effect and stability of cosmetics, and thus the performance and component-based multi-functionalities of cosmetic products. Those have partially contributed to the condition-dependent functionality, developments in the field of marketing, monitoring of expectations and their reflection on marketing and the creation of new ideas in the field of claim-driven multi-functionality. Multi-functionality in cosmetic products can be evaluated in four groups. These are performance-based multi-functionality, component-based multi-functionality, conditional multi-functionality and claim-driven multi-functionality. In the first two groups, performance related to formulation and manufacturing comes to the fore, while in the last two, safety becomes important and those are briefly given in this review. Peer Review History: Received: 12 May 2021; Revised: 11 June; Accepted: 25 June, Available online: 15 July 2021 Academic Editor: Ahmad Najib, Universitas Muslim Indonesia, Makassar, Indonesia, ahmad.najib@umi.ac.id UJPR follows the most transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review’ system. The identity of the authors and, reviewers will be known to each other. This transparent process will help to eradicate any possible malicious/purposeful interference by any person (publishing staff, reviewer, editor, author, etc) during peer review. As a result of this unique system, all reviewers will get their due recognition and respect, once their names are published in the papers. We expect that, by publishing peer review reports with published papers, will be helpful to many authors for drafting their article according to the specifications. Auhors will remove any error of their article and they will improve their article(s) according to the previous reports displayed with published article(s). The main purpose of it is ‘to improve the quality of a candidate manuscript’. Our reviewers check the ‘strength and weakness of a manuscript honestly’. There will increase in the perfection, and transparency. Received file: Reviewer's Comments: Average Peer review marks at initial stage: 6.0/10 Average Peer review marks at publication stage: 7.5/10 Reviewer(s) detail: Dr. Govind Vyas, Compliance & Regulatory Officer Inva-Tech Pharmaceuticals LLC, New-Jersey, USA, gov