ReviewCellulose (London, England)2022
Nanocellulose-based membrane as a potential material for high performance biodegradable aerosol respirators for SARS-CoV-2 prevention: a review.
Review in Cellulose (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Green Nanomaterials for Smart Textiles Dedicated to Environmental and Biomedical Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Advancements of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials in Environmental and Human Protection for Combatting the COVID-19 During and Post-pandemic Era: A Comprehensive Scientific Review.Biomedical materials & devices (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Review
- ZnO-PLLA/PLLA Preparation and Application in Air Filtration by Electrospinning Technology.Polymers · 2023Article
- Biodegradable Electrospun Nanofiber Membranes as Promising Candidates for the Development of Face Masks.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The controversy surrounding the transmission of COVID-19 in 2020 has revealed the need to better understand the airborne transmission route of respiratory viruses to establish appropriate strategies to limit their transmission. The effectiveness in protecting against COVID-19 has led to a high demand for face masks. This includes the single-use of non-degradable masks and Filtering Facepiece Respirators by a large proportion of the public, leading to environmental concerns related to waste management. Thus, nanocellulose-based membranes are a promising environmental solution for aerosol filtration due to their biodegradability, renewability, biocompatibility, high specific surface area, non-toxicity, ease of functionalization and worldwide availability. Although the technology for producing high-performance aerosol filter membranes from cellulose-based materials is still in its initial stage, several promising results show the prospects of the use of this kind of materials. This review focuses on the overview of nanocellulose-based filter media, including its processing, desirable characteristics and recent developments regarding filtration, functionalization, biodegradability, and mechanical behavior. The porosity control, surface wettability and surface functional groups resulting from the silylation treatment to improve the filtration capacity of the nanocellulose-based membrane is discussed. Future research trends in this area are planned to develop the air filter media by reinforcing the filter membrane structure of CNF with CNCs. In addition, the integration of sol-gel technology into the production of an air filter can tailor the pore size of the membrane for a viable physical screening solution in future studies. Graphical abstract:
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.