Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29959736›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2018

Wetlands for wastewater treatment and subsequent recycling of treated effluent: a review.

Suhad A A A N Almuktar, Suhail N Abed, Miklas Scholz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Sustainable triphasic macrophyte-substrate-microbial synergies in constructed wetlands for textile wastewater treatment.Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research · 2026
    Review
  3. Transcriptionally active ammonia-oxidizing nitrifiers in a surface flow constructed wetland.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors.

Suhad A A A N AlmuktarCivil Engineering Research Group, School of Computing, Science and Engineering, The University of Salford, Newton Building, Salford, England, M5 4WT, UK.
Suhail N AbedCivil Engineering Research Group, School of Computing, Science and Engineering, The University of Salford, Newton Building, Salford, England, M5 4WT, UK.
Miklas ScholzCivil Engineering Research Group, School of Computing, Science and Engineering, The University of Salford, Newton Building, Salford, England, M5 4WT, UK. miklas.scholz@tvrl.lth.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8919-3838

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to water scarcity challenges around the world, it is essential to think about non-conventional water resources to address the increased demand in clean freshwater. Environmental and public health problems may result from insufficient provision of sanitation and wastewater disposal facilities. Because of this, wastewater treatment and recycling methods will be vital to provide sufficient freshwater in the coming decades, since water resources are limited and more than 70% of water are consumed for irrigation purposes. Therefore, the application of treated wastewater for agricultural irrigation has much potential, especially when incorporating the reuse of nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous, which are essential for plant production. Among the current treatment technologies applied in urban wastewater reuse for irrigation, wetlands were concluded to be the one of the most suitable ones in terms of pollutant removal and have advantages due to both low maintenance costs and required energy. Wetland behavior and efficiency concerning wastewater treatment is mainly linked to macrophyte composition, substrate, hydrology, surface loading rate, influent feeding mode, microorganism availability, and temperature. Constructed wetlands are very effective in removing organics and suspended solids, whereas the removal of nitrogen is relatively low, but could be improved by using a combination of various types of constructed wetlands meeting the irrigation reuse standards. The removal of phosphorus is usually low, unless special media with high sorption capacity are used. Pathogen removal from wetland effluent to meet irrigation reuse standards is a challenge unless supplementary lagoons or hybrid wetland systems are used.

Indexed as

Agricultural IrrigationWetlandsCitiesNitrogenPhosphorusRecyclingWaste Disposal, FluidWastewaterWater PurificationNitrogenPhosphorusWastewaterConstructed reed bedPhytoremediationPollution controlSustainable managementTreatment technologyWastewater reclamationWater reuseWater scarcity

Identifiers

PMID29959736
PMCPMC6096557

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.