Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39408479›Full record

ReviewPolymers2024

Recycling Technologies for Biopolymers: Current Challenges and Future Directions.

Adenike A Akinsemolu, Adetola M Idowu, Helen N Onyeaka

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

3 authors.

Adenike A AkinsemoluSchool of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6360-9356
Adetola M IdowuFaculty of Life Sciences, Rhein-Waal University of Applied Science, 47533 Kleve, Germany.
Helen N OnyeakaSchool of Chemical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3846-847X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plastic pollution is a major driver of climate change that is associated with biodiversity loss, greenhouse gas emissions, and negative soil, plant, animal, and human health. One of the solutions that has been proposed and is currently reducing the adverse effects of plastic on the planet is the replacement of synthetic plastics with biopolymers. The biodegradable polymers have been adapted for most of the applications of synthetic plastic. However, their use and disposal present some sustainability challenges. Recycling emerges as an effective way of promoting the sustainability of biopolymer use. In this article, we review recycling as a viable solution to improve the sustainability of biopolymers, emphasizing the current types and technologies employed in biopolymer recycling and the challenges faced in their adoption. Our exploration of the future directions in the conversion of biopolymers into new polymers for reuse establishes a connection between established continuous technological innovation, integration into circular economy models, and the establishment and strengthening of collaborations among key stakeholders in relevant industries as necessary steps for the adoption, full utilization, and improvement of recycling technologies for biopolymers. By connecting these factors, this study lays a foundation for the establishment of a roadmap for improved biopolymer recycling technologies and processes that promote the sustainability of synthetic plastic alternatives.

Indexed as

applicationbiodegradablebiopolymerrecyclingsustainability

Identifiers

PMID39408479
PMCPMC11478719

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.