ReviewGlobal challenges (Hoboken, NJ)2022
Low Formaldehyde Binders for Mineral Wool Insulation: A Review.
Review in Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Composition-Dependent Performance of Hydrophobic Glass Wool Fiber Aerogels for Oil Absorption and Thermal Insulation.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Low Formaldehyde Binders for Mineral Wool Insulation: A Review.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Insulating materials are ubiquitous in a built environment and play a critical role in reducing the energy consumed to maintain habitable indoor environments. Mineral wool insulation (MWI) products, including glass, stone, and slag variants, are the most widely used class of insulating materials in Europe and account for more than 50% of the total market by volume. MWI typically consists of two key components: a mesh of inorganic fibers that are several micrometers in diameter, and an organic thermosetting adhesive commonly referred to as the "binder." Traditional phenol-formaldehyde-urea (PFU) binders used in the manufacture of MWI are increasingly being scrutinized for the formaldehyde released during their manufacture and service lifetime. The recent classification of formaldehyde as a carcinogen by various safety organizations has accelerated a paradigm shift within the industry toward alternative binder technologies that minimize or indeed eliminate formaldehyde emissions. This review examines more recent strategies for achieving low- or zero-added formaldehyde binders for MWI, with a particular focus on the patent literature. The chemistry underpinning traditional PFU binders is presented and compared to new strategies involving scavenging molecules that decrease formaldehyde emissions, as well as zero-added formaldehyde binder technologies such as polyester, Maillard, and epoxide thermosets.
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.