ArticleJournal of environmental health science & engineering2023
Microplastics removal technologies from aqueous environments: a systematic review.
Article in Journal of environmental health science & engineering, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recent Advances in ZIF Membrane: Fabrication, Separation Ability and Its Application.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Pollution of the environment with all kinds of plastics has become a growing problem. The problem of microplastics is mainly due to the absorption of stable organic pollutants and metals into them, and as a result, their environmental toxicity increases. The main purpose of this study is to investigate the appropriate and efficient methods of removing microplastics from aqueous environments through a systematic review. Methods: Present study designed according to PRISMA guidelines. Two independent researchers followed all process from search to final analysis, for the relevant studies using international databases of PubMed, Scopus and ISI/WOS (Web of Science), without time limit. The search strategy developed based on the main axis of "microplastics", "aqueous environments" and "removal". This research was carried out from 2017 until the March of 2022. All relevant observational, analytical studies, review articles, and a meta-analysis were included. Results: Through a comprehensive systematic search we found 2974 papers, after running the proses of refining, 80 eligible papers included to the study. According to the results of the review, the methods of removing microplastics from aquatic environments were divided to physical (12), chemical (18), physicochemical (27), biological (12) and integrated (11) methods. In different removal methods, the most dominant group of studied microplastics belonged to the four groups of polyethylene (PE), polystyrene (PS), polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene tetra phthalate (PET). Average removal efficiency of microplastics in different processes in each method was as: physical method (73.76%), chemical method (74.38%), physicochemical method (80.44%), biological method (75.23%) and integrated method (88.63%). The highest removal efficiency occurred in the processes based on the integrated method and the lowest efficiency occurred in the physical method. In total, 80% of the studies were conducted on a laboratory scale, 18.75% on a full scale and 1.25% on a pilot scale. Conclusion: According to the findings; different processes based on physical, chemical, physicochemical, biological and integrated methods are able to remove microplastics with high efficiency from aqueous environments and in order to reduce their hazardous effects on health and environment, these processes can be easily used.
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.