ArticleJournal of hazardous materials letters2023
Burning questions: Current practices and critical gaps in evaluating removal of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) during pyrolysis treatments of biosolids.
Article in Journal of hazardous materials letters, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thermochemical Treatment of Wastewater Residual Solids for Global Mitigation of Emerging Contaminants.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Carbon Materials Derived from Waste Streams: From Processing Pathways to Structure-Property-Function Relationships.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Impact of GenX onJournal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Evaluation of the Analytical Efficiency of Combustion Ion Chromatography for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Biological and Environmental Matrices.Environmental science & technology · 2025Article
- Filling the Gaps in PFAS Detection: Integrating GC-MS Non-Targeted Analysis for Comprehensive Environmental Monitoring and Exposure Assessment.Environmental science & technology letters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Concerns surrounding potential health and environmental impacts of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are growing at tremendous rates because adverse health impacts are expected with trace-level exposures. Extreme measures are required to mitigate potential PFAS contamination and minimize exposures. Extensive PFAS use results in the release of diverse PFAS species from domestic, industrial, and municipal effluents to wastewater, which partition to biosolids throughout secondary treatment. Biosolids generated during municipal wastewater treatment are a major environmental source of PFAS due to prevailing disposal practices as fertilizers. Pyrolysis is emerging as a viable, scalable technology for PFAS removal from biosolids while retaining nutrients and generating renewable, raw materials for energy generation. Despite early successes of pyrolysis in PFAS removal, significant unknowns remain about PFAS and transformation product fates in pyrolysis products and emissions. Applicable PFAS sampling methods, analytical workflows, and removal assessments are currently limited to a subset of high-interest analytes and matrices. Further, analysis of exhaust gases, particulate matter, fly ashes, and other pyrolysis end-products remain largely unreported or limited due to cost and sampling limitations. This paper identifies critical knowledge gaps on the pyrolysis of biosolids that must be addressed to assess the effectiveness of PFAS removal during pyrolysis treatment.
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.