ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Nanomaterials for Persistent Organic Pollutants Decontamination in Water: Mechanisms, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.
Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
- Application of Nanotechnology in Detection and Removal of Pollutants in Water System.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Next generation materials for environmental remediation through advanced mechanisms and future perspectives.Discover nano · 2026Review
- Synthesis, Characterization and In Vitro Bioactivity of Magnetite Nanoparticles Obtained by Co-Precipitation.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Transforming soil decontamination: the role and prospects of nanotechnological remediation.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Article
- Microfluidic Synthesis and Decontamination Evaluation of a Mg/Fe-LDH-Silica Hybrid Composite for Advanced Water Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Review
- Synthesis of biogenic silver nanoparticles usingRSC advances · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nanomaterials possess unique physicochemical properties that position them as promising candidates for environmental remediation, particularly in the removal of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) from aqueous systems. Their high surface area, tunable functionality, and strong adsorption capabilities have attracted significant attention. In this context, this paper reviews the mechanisms of nanomaterial-based POP decontamination, also providing a critical overview of the limitations and challenges in applying these methods. Specifically, issues of stability, reusability, and aggregation are discussed, which can lead to performance decay during repeated use. In addition, the practical application requires nanocomposites to enable efficient separation and mitigate agglomeration. Environmental concerns also arise from nanomaterials' fate, transport, and potential toxicity, which may impact aquatic ecosystems and non-target organisms. When checking for large-scale application feasibility, impurities typically add to production costs, recovery problems, and general infrastructure limitations. In addition to these points, there are no standard guidelines or clear risk assessment procedures for registering a product. Unprecedented cross-disciplinary research between natural, human, and technological studies and outreach programs is needed to facilitate the development and diffusion of the results. The barriers will eventually be breached to move from laboratory success in developing the desperately needed new water purification technologies to field-ready water treatment solutions that can address the global POP contamination problem.
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.