Next Article in Journal
Preparation of Ag3PO4/TiO2(B) Heterojunction Nanobelt with Extended Light Response and Enhanced Photocatalytic Performance
Previous Article in Journal
GC/MS Analysis of Essential Oil and Enzyme Inhibitory Activities of Syzygium cumini (Pamposia) Grown in Egypt: Chemical Characterization and Molecular Docking Studies
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Validation of the Developed Zero-Order Infrared Spectrophotometry Method for Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses of Tranexamic Acid in Marketed Tablets

Molecules 2021, 26(22), 6985; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26226985
by Nerdy Nerdy 1,*, Linda Margata 1, Bunga Mari Sembiring 2, Selamat Ginting 2, Effendy De Lux Putra 3 and Tedy Kurniawan Bakri 4
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Molecules 2021, 26(22), 6985; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26226985
Submission received: 30 September 2021 / Revised: 16 November 2021 / Accepted: 16 November 2021 / Published: 19 November 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

the manuscript entitled: "Validation of The Developed Zero-Order Infrared Spectrophotometry Method for Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses of Tranexamic Acid in Marketed Tablets" present the development of a quantification method for Tranexamic acid.  In general, the manuscript lacks novelty, and the authors should stress more the importance of developing this approach. Moreover, I have some other comments: 

1) The authors should provide a more complete state of the art, in particular indicating other works where the same procedure has been used for other active principles.

2) Nowadays it is easy to find downloadable functions for regression methods. Why did the authors not employ a chemometric regression method for quantifying the active ingredient in tablets?  

3) please tale care of checking the units on figures' axes are correctly written (apex missing)

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript. Herewith, I upload the point-to-point responses.

Regards,

Nerdy

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the authors reported a IR method for qualitative and quantitative analyses of tranexamic acid in marketed tablets. Although the manuscript is well organized, I have the following questions that need to be answered appropriately by the authors before it can be considered for publication in Molecules.

  1. Line 28: coefficient of determination or correlation?
  2. Introduction, 1stpara: in my opinion, this para can be simplified. Maybe one sentence is just ok.
  3. Line 58: can you compare the current method to the one in Ref. 11? Especially, need to conclude the improvement if it has.
  4. Line 80: for IR, the most drawback is its low sensitivity compared to other main stream instrumental analysis methods, e.g. HPLC. So, please rephrase the sentence.
  5. Line 151 & Line 163: in Ref 34 and 36 the ATR-FTIR was used to acquire the IR spectra, where the sample thickness can be regarded as a fixed value. In accordance with the Lambert Beer Law, only when L (sample thickness or optical path length) is fixed, it can be assumed that there is a linear relationship between concentration and absorbance. However, how to ensure the uniform thickness during sample pressing?
  6. Line 201: what is the reference method for determination of tranexamic acid in marketed tablet. It should be clearly described with the process, method assessment, etc.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you for reviewing our manuscript. Herewith, I upload the point-to-point responses.

 

Regards,

Nerdy

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have widely modified the manuscript, improving it quite a lot. 
There is a typo at line 184 ("can analzse"), after its correction, the manuscript can be accepted for publication.

Author Response

Typo at line 179 "can analzse" have been revised to "can analyze"

Note: There was a change from line 184 to line 179 due to duplication of lines 154-160 and lines 161-166.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Lines 154-160 and Lines 161-166 are duplicated.

Author Response

Duplication on line 154-160 and line 161-166 has been revised

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop