Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31956793›Full record

ArticleACS omega2020

Investigation of CNT/PPy-Modified Carbon Paper Electrodes under Anaerobic and Aerobic Conditions for Phenol Bioremediation in Microbial Fuel Cells.

Nishat Khan, Abdul Hakeem Anwer, Anees Ahmad, Suhail Sabir, Surajbhan Sevda, Mohammad Zain Khan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS omega, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Removal of Cr(vi) andRSC advances · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nishat KhanEnvironmental Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202 002, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Abdul Hakeem AnwerEnvironmental Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202 002, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Anees AhmadEnvironmental Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202 002, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Suhail SabirEnvironmental Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202 002, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Surajbhan SevdaDepartment of Biosciences and Bioengineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, Assam 781039, India.
Mohammad Zain KhanEnvironmental Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry and Industrial Chemistry Research Laboratory, Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202 002, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Aligarh Muslim University · INIndian Institute of Technology Guwahati · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study presents the comparative bioelectrochemical treatment of phenol in anodic and cathodic compartments of four identical dual chambered microbial fuel cells (MFCs) with bare and multiwalled carbon nanotube/polypyrrole (MWCNT/PPy)-coated electrodes, respectively. It was observed that systems performing biocathodic treatment of phenol performed better as compared to the systems performing bioanodic treatment. The maximum power densities for bioanodic phenol treatment using bare and coated electrodes were found to be 469.038 and 560.719 mW/m

Identifiers

PMID31956793
PMCPMC6964299
OpenAlexW2997047059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.