ArticleFrontiers in chemistry2026
Geochemical fate of lead in contaminated residential soils following application of amendments for lead immobilization.
Article in Frontiers in chemistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community responses to soil remediation for lead exposure reduction in Mirzapur, Bangladesh.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Article
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
Background: Lead (Pb) persists in urban soils, where its partitioning among geochemical fractions governs mobility, bioavailability, and human health risk. These fractions are strongly controlled by soil physicochemical properties, necessitating site-specific remediation strategies. Methods: This study developed a site-specific Pb immobilization framework linking amendment selection to soil geochemistry and sustainability considerations. Pb-contaminated residential soils from three U.S. cities, San Antonio (alkaline), Baltimore (acidic), and Detroit (near-neutral), were treated with gypsum, biochar + lime, and alum, respectively. Changes in Pb speciation were tracked using sequential extraction over 7, 30, and 90 days. Results: All amendments significantly reduced exchangeable Pb (F1) and increased less mobile fractions (F2-F3). Gypsum reduced F1 by ∼30% in San Antonio soils with minimal pH change, coincident with increased carbonate- and oxide-bound Pb. Biochar + lime reduced F1 by ∼50% in Baltimore soils, driven by a 0.4-0.8 pH increase and enhanced carbonate- and organic-bound Pb (F2-F4). Alum reduced F1 by ∼28% in Detroit soils, with transient pH shifts and strong increases in oxide-bound Pb (F3). Conclusion: Despite contrasting soil chemistries, all treatments achieved rapid and statistically significant Pb stabilization via distinct mechanisms, including Ca
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.