ReviewJACS Au2024
Challenges and Perspectives of Environmental Catalysis for NO
Review in JACS Au, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Yolk-shell zeolite nanoreactors enable multi-poison resistance for NONature communications · 2026Article
- Cascade Electrocatalytic Reduction of Nitrate to Ammonia Using Bimetallic Covalent Organic Frameworks with Tandem Active Sites.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2025Article
- Metal-Organic Framework (MOF)-Derived Metal Oxides for Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) of NOMolecules (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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental catalysis has attracted great interest in air and water purification. Selective catalytic reduction with ammonia (NH
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.