Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36618856›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in chemistry2022

Review of recent developments in iodine wasteform production.

R Matthew Asmussen, Joshua Turner, Saehwa Chong, Brian J Riley

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in chemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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.

R Matthew AsmussenPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, United States.
Joshua TurnerNational Nuclear Laboratory, Sellafield, Cumbria, United Kingdom.
Saehwa ChongPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, United States.
Brian J RileyPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radioiodine capture and immobilization is not only important to consider during the operation of reactors (i.e., I-131), during nuclear accidents (i.e., I-131 and I-129) or nuclear fuel reprocessing (i.e., I-131 and I-129), but also during disposal of nuclear wastes (i.e., I-129). Most disposal plans for I-129-containing waste forms (including spent nuclear fuel) propose to store them in underground repositories. Here, iodine can be highly mobile and, given its radiotoxicity, needs to be carefully managed to minimize long-term environmental impacts arising from disposal. Typically, any process that has been used to capture iodine from reprocessing or in a reactor is not suitable for direct disposal, rather conversion into a wasteform for disposal is required. The objectives of these materials are to use either chemical immobilization or physical encapsulation to reduce the leaching of iodine by groundwaters. Some of the more recent ideas have been to design capture materials that better align with disposal concepts, making the industrial processing requirements easier. Research on iodine capture materials and wasteforms has been extensive. This review will act as both an update on the state of the research since the last time it was comprehensively summarized, and an evaluation of the industrial techniques required to create the proposed iodine wasteforms in terms of resulting material chemistry and applicability.

Indexed as

disposalI-129iodinenuclear reprocessingwasteforms

Identifiers

PMID36618856
PMCPMC9816813

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.