Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35754932›Full record

ReviewApplied water science2022

Removal of lead ions (Pb

Imran Rahman Chowdhury, Shakhawat Chowdhury, Mohammad Abu Jafar Mazumder, Amir Al-Ahmed

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Applied water science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. A Label-free Simple Biosensor for PbJournal of fluorescence · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Cobalt Ion Removal by Activated Carbon and Biochar Derived fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Monitoring Lead-Phosphorus Interactions ThroughGels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Fabrication of CaCOMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    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.

Imran Rahman ChowdhuryDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, 31261 Saudi Arabia.
Shakhawat ChowdhuryDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, 31261 Saudi Arabia.
Mohammad Abu Jafar MazumderDepartment of Chemistry, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, 31261 Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-2241-9596
Amir Al-AhmedInterdisciplinary Research Center for Renewable Energy and Power Systems, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, 31261 Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The presence of lead compounds in the environment is an issue. In particular, supply water consumption has been reported to be a significant source of human exposure to lead compounds, which can pose an elevated risk to humans. Due to its toxicity, the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) have classified lead (Pb) and its compounds as probable human carcinogens. The European Community Directive and World Health Organization have set the maximum acceptable lead limits in tap water as 10 µg/L. The USEPA has a guideline value of 15 µg/L in drinking water. Removal of lead ions from water and wastewater is of great importance from regulatory and health perspectives. To date, several hundred publications have been reported on the removal of lead ions from an aqueous solution. This study reviewed the research findings on the low-cost removal of lead ions using different types of adsorbents. The research achievements to date and the limitations were investigated. Different types of adsorbents were compared with respect to adsorption capacity, removal performances, sorbent dose, optimum pH, temperature, initial concentration, and contact time. The best adsorbents and the scopes of improvements were identified. The adsorption capacity of natural materials, industrial byproducts, agricultural waste, forest waste, and biotechnology-based adsorbents were in the ranges of 0.8-333.3 mg/g, 2.5-524.0 mg/g, 0.7-2079 mg/g, 0.4-769.2 mg/g, and 7.6-526.0 mg/g, respectively. The removal efficiency for these adsorbents was in the range of 13.6-100%. Future research to improve these adsorbents might assist in developing low-cost adsorbents for mass-scale applications.

Indexed as

Health risksLead contaminationLow-cost adsorbentsRemoval of lead ionsReuse and regenerationWater and wastewater treatment

Identifiers

PMID35754932
PMCPMC9213643

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.