ArticleScientific reports2025
Mechanistic insights into efficient catechol removal using saponin-based emulsion liquid membrane.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Catechol, a toxic organic pollutant commonly discharged from industrial effluents, poses serious threats to aquatic ecosystems and human health. In this study, saponin-based Emulsion Liquid Membranes (ELM) were developed as a green and sustainable alternative for catechol removal from wastewater. Saponin, a natural emulsifier, was used to formulate oil-based ELM, and the membrane phase was characterized using interfacial, rheological, and dynamic light scattering techniques. Process optimization through the Box-Behnken Design achieved an extraction efficiency of 88.9% with only 2% membrane breakage under optimal conditions of 3 v/v% saponin concentration, 2 v/v% span 80 concentration, 0.15 M internal phase concentration, and 30 min contact time. Kinetic studies revealed that the pseudo-second-order model best described the extraction process, with a rate constant of 0.0576 min
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.