Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34202727›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Removal of Pesticides from Waters by Adsorption: Comparison between Synthetic Zeolites and Mesoporous Silica Materials. A Review.

Magdalena Andrunik, Tomasz Bajda

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Degradation features of pesticides: a review on (metallo)porphyrin-mediated catalytic processes.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022
    Review
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

2 authors.

Magdalena AndrunikFaculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, AGH University of Science and Technology, al. Mickiewicza 30, 30-059 Krakow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4606-3440
Tomasz BajdaFaculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, AGH University of Science and Technology, al. Mickiewicza 30, 30-059 Krakow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3849-5558

Funding

Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej POIR.04.04.00-00-14E6/18-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pesticides are pollutants found in wastewater due to increasing agricultural activities over the years. Inappropriate dosing of pesticides results in the dispersal of active ingredients in the environment. The complete removal of pesticides from wastewater is an immediate concern due to their high toxicity and mobility. At present, adsorption is one of the most widely used methods for pesticide removal, in which synthetic zeolites and mesoporous silica materials are extensively applied. This article presents a systematic and comparative review of the applications and comparison of these adsorbents, based on the data reported in the literature. The paper summarizes the information collected from various studies, including the type of adsorbents and pesticides used, experimental conditions, and results of each work. The studies analyzed were laboratory-based and show potential advantages for the treatment of pesticide-bearing waters using functionalized and unfunctionalized synthetic zeolites and mesoporous silica materials. As a whole, functionalized materials are reported to exhibit better removal performance for different pesticides than conventional materials. It is expected that the results of this review will help researchers to establish a powerful strategy for the abatement of pesticides in wastewater.

Indexed as

agricultural wastesorganic compoundssilicatessorptionwater treatment

Identifiers

PMID34202727
PMCPMC8269501

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.