ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2016
Comparison of UV photolysis, nanofiltration, and their combination to remove hormones from a drinking water source and reduce endocrine disrupting activity.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Iron-impregnated zeolite catalyst for efficient removal of micropollutants at very low concentration from Meurthe river.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A sequential water treatment combining low pressure ultraviolet direct photolysis with nanofiltration was evaluated to remove hormones from water, reduce endocrine disrupting activity, and overcome the drawbacks associated with the individual processes (production of a nanofiltration-concentrated retentate and formation of toxic by-products). 17β-Estradiol, 17α-ethinylestradiol, estrone, estriol, and progesterone were spiked into a real water sample collected after the sedimentation process of a drinking water treatment plant. Even though the nanofiltration process alone showed similar results to the combined treatment in terms of the water quality produced, the combined treatment offered advantage in terms of the load of the retentate and decrease in the endocrine-disrupting activity of the samples. Moreover, the photolysis by-products produced, with higher endocrine disrupting activity than the parent compounds, were effectively retained by the membrane. The combination of direct LP/UV photolysis with nanofiltration is promising for a drinking water utility that needs to cope with sudden punctual discharges or deterioration of the water quality and wants to decrease the levels of chemicals in the nanofiltration retentate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.