ReviewToxics2024
Approaches for the Efficient Removal of Fluoride from Groundwater: A Comprehensive Review.
Review in Toxics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanistic understanding and comprehensive insights into green-synthesized cerium oxide nanoparticles and its applications.Discover nano · 2026Review
- Effects of Dietary Activated Charcoal Supplementation on Performance, Egg Quality, and Bone Calcification in Laying Hens Exposed to High Fluoride.Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and consequences of geogenic fluoride exposure on oral and dental health in Nakuru, Kenya.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Water Absorption and Solubility of Fluoride-Based Restorative Materials Exposed to Ionizing Radiation.Polymers · 2025Article
- Nanoparticle-assisted microbial remediation as a potential approach to groundwater fluoride contamination.3 Biotech · 2025Review
- Fluoride: Toxicity, Mechanism and Role of Bioremediation in Detoxification.Current microbiology · 2025Review
- Time lag effect of precipitation on groundwater level based on wavelet analysis in the People's Victory Canal irrigation area, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contamination of groundwater with fluoride represents a significant global issue, with high concentrations posing serious public health threats. While fluoride is a critical element in water, excessive levels can be detrimental to human health and potentially life-threatening. Addressing the challenge of removing fluoride from underground water sources via nanotechnological approaches is a pressing concern in environmental science. To collate relevant information, extensive literature searches were conducted across multiple databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, the American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Springer, and the Royal Society of Chemistry. VOS Viewer software version 1.6.20 was employed for a systematic review. This article delivers an exhaustive evaluation of various groundwater fluoride removal techniques, such as adsorption, membrane filtration, electrocoagulation, photocatalysis, and ion exchange. Among these, the application of nanoparticles emerges as a notable method. The article delves into nano-compounds, optimizing conditions for the fluoride removal process and benchmarking their efficacy against other techniques. Studies demonstrate that advanced nanotechnologies-owing to their rapid reaction times and potent oxidation capabilities-can remove fluoride effectively. The implementation of nanotechnologies in fluoride removal not only enhances water quality but also contributes to the safeguarding of human health.
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.