ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative study of Waste-Derived and conventional sorbents for heavy metal removal from water.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, the effectiveness of various waste sorbents (coffee grounds, hazelnut shells, and compost) was compared with sorbents such as chitosan and bentonite for the removal of heavy metals: zinc, lead, cadmium, and copper (Zn, Pb, Cd, Cu, respectively) from aqueous solution. Their composition, ash content, and moisture content were characterized. The BET method was used to determine the surface area. The size and type of pores were determined using the BJH and DFT methods. The presence of functional groups was identified using FTIR. The sorbents differed significantly in terms of pore quantity and size, as well as specific surface area. The highest specific surface area of 40 m²/g was determined for bentonite, while for coffee it was below the detection limit, at 2 m²/g. FTIR analysis confirmed the presence of numerous and diverse functional groups characteristic of each sorbent, e.g., C = O, C-O-C, O-H. All materials effectively removed heavy metals. For the smallest mass of sorbents used (0.1 g), the following metal removal efficiencies were achieved: 95% Zn (chitosan), 99% Cu (compost), 95% Pb (hazelnut shell), and 72% Cd (hazelnut shell). Bentonite proved to be the least effective sorbent of all the materials analyzed.
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.