ReviewChemical reviews2022
Single-Atom Catalysis: Insights from Model Systems.
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 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of size-selected Pt cluster catalysts on prototypical oxide supports.Faraday discussions · 2026Article
- Adaptive Reduction of Multicollinearity for Machine Learning Prediction of CO Adsorption Energies on Single Atoms.Precision chemistry · 2026Article
- Single Metal Atoms for Energy Storage and Conversion: Recent Advances, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Small methods · 2026Review
- Atomic-level engineering of single-atom catalysts for selective C-C coupling in COChemical science · 2026Review
- Hydrogen Activation via Dihydride Formation on a RhAngewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2026Article
- Pt Single Atom Co-Catalysts on Thin, Defined Anatase Layers: Critical Factors for Photocatalytic Hydrogen Generation.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Article
- Engineering Catalytic Efficiency by Thiolate-Protected Trimetallic (Cu, Pd, Au) Nanoclusters: Single-Atom Alloy Catalysts for Water-Gas Shift.ACS catalysis · 2025Article
- Single-Atom Catalysts on Goldene.ACS catalysis · 2025Article
- Single Atom Engineering for Electrocatalysis: Fundamentals and Applications.ACS catalysis · 2025Review
- Ambient pressure XPS at MAX IV.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2025Review
- Digging Its Own Site: Linear Coordination Stabilizes a PtACS nano · 2024Article
- A Multitechnique Study of CThe journal of physical chemistry. C, Nanomaterials and interfaces · 2024Article
- Inflammation-free electrochemical in vivo sensing of dopamine with atomic-level engineered antioxidative single-atom catalyst.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Reduction of (100)-Faceted CeOChemistry of materials : a publication of the American Chemical Society · 2024Article
- Enhancing Photocatalysis: Understanding the Mechanistic Diversity in Photocatalysts Modified with Single-Atom Catalytic Sites.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- The Role ofChemical reviews · 2023Review
- Advances on Axial Coordination Design of Single-Atom Catalysts for Energy Electrocatalysis: A Review.Nano-micro letters · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The field of single-atom catalysis (SAC) has expanded greatly in recent years. While there has been much success developing new synthesis methods, a fundamental disconnect exists between most experiments and the theoretical computations used to model them. The real catalysts are based on powder supports, which inevitably contain a multitude of different facets, different surface sites, defects, hydroxyl groups, and other contaminants due to the environment. This makes it extremely difficult to determine the structure of the active SAC site using current techniques. To be tractable, computations aimed at modeling SAC utilize periodic boundary conditions and low-index facets of an idealized support. Thus, the reaction barriers and mechanisms determined computationally represent, at best, a plausibility argument, and there is a strong chance that some critical aspect is omitted. One way to better understand what is plausible is by experimental modeling, i.e., comparing the results of computations to experiments based on precisely defined single-crystalline supports prepared in an ultrahigh-vacuum (UHV) environment. In this review, we report the status of the surface-science literature as it pertains to SAC. We focus on experimental work on supports where the site of the metal atom are unambiguously determined from experiment, in particular, the surfaces of rutile and anatase TiO
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.