Article in ChemCatChem, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
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
13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Shuang YangInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Hongyu AnInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Dimitra AnastasiadouLaboratory of Inorganic Materials and Catalysis Department of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Eindhoven University of Technology 5600 MB Eindhoven (The Netherlands.
Wenjie XuNational Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory CAS Center for Excellence in Nanoscience University of Science and Technology of China Hefei 230029 P. R. China.
Longfei WuInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Hui WangInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Jim de RuiterInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Sven ArnoutsElectron Microscopy for Materials Science (EMAT) University of Antwerp 2020 Antwerp Belgium.
Marta C FigueiredoLaboratory of Inorganic Materials and Catalysis Department of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Eindhoven University of Technology 5600 MB Eindhoven (The Netherlands.
Sara BalsElectron Microscopy for Materials Science (EMAT) University of Antwerp 2020 Antwerp Belgium.
Thomas AltantzisApplied Electrochemistry and Catalysis (ELCAT) University of Antwerp Antwerpen 2610 Wilrijk Belgium.
Ward van der StamInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Bert M WeckhuysenInorganic Chemistry and Catalysis Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science Utrecht University 3584 CG Utrecht (The Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLUniversity of Antwerp · BEEindhoven University of Technology · NLNational Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory · CN
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
It remains a real challenge to control the selectivity of the electrocatalytic CO
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.
Waste-Derived Copper-Lead Electrocatalysts for CO · full record | OpenQuestion