Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34928131›Full record

ReviewChemical reviews2022

Implicit Solvation Methods for Catalysis at Electrified Interfaces.

Stefan Ringe, Nicolas G Hörmann, Harald Oberhofer, Karsten Reuter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Chemical reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Tuned interfacial hydrogen bonds for enhanced HCommunications chemistry · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Atomistic Insights into the Electrochemical Oxygen Evolution Activity of Hollandite IrOAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Stefan RingeDepartment of Chemistry, Korea University, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7804-1406
Nicolas G HörmannFritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Faradayweg 4-6, D-14195 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6944-5575
Harald OberhoferChair for Theoretical Chemistry and Catalysis Research Center, Technische Universität München, Lichtenbergstraße 4, D-85747 Garching, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5791-6736
Karsten ReuterFritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Faradayweg 4-6, D-14195 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8473-8659

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implicit solvation is an effective, highly coarse-grained approach in atomic-scale simulations to account for a surrounding liquid electrolyte on the level of a continuous polarizable medium. Originating in molecular chemistry with finite solutes, implicit solvation techniques are now increasingly used in the context of first-principles modeling of electrochemistry and electrocatalysis at extended (often metallic) electrodes. The prevalent ansatz to model the latter electrodes and the reactive surface chemistry at them through slabs in periodic boundary condition supercells brings its specific challenges. Foremost this concerns the difficulty of describing the entire double layer forming at the electrified solid-liquid interface (SLI) within supercell sizes tractable by commonly employed density functional theory (DFT). We review liquid solvation methodology from this specific application angle, highlighting in particular its use in the widespread

Identifiers

PMID34928131
PMCPMC9227731

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.