ReviewMembranes2026
Separation of Organic Carbon and Nutrients from Liquid Waste by Using Membrane Technologies.
Review in Membranes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rising concentrations of organic carbon (OC), phosphorus, and nitrogen in liquid waste from urban, industrial, and agricultural sources pose persistent challenges for environmental protection and resource recovery. Despite extensive application of microfiltration (MF) and ultrafiltration (UF) in wastewater treatment, their role in selective organic carbon and nutrient fractionation remains insufficiently clear-cut and is often interpreted solely through nominal pore size. This review was guided by the hypothesis that the reported limitations of MF and UF for nutrient separation are not intrinsic to the technologies but arise from simplified interpretations of separation mechanisms. A unified analytical framework was developed by synthesizing recent studies, linking membrane surface charge, pore structure, solute speciation, fouling-induced secondary layers, and operating conditions to the observed separation behavior. The analysis shows that MF fractionates particulate OC and suspended solids, whereas UF extends separation to macromolecular OC and phosphorus mainly via indirect retention mechanisms. Dissolved nitrogen species largely permeate both membranes unless they are transformed into retainable forms. Performance differences between MF and UF are conditional and system-dependent, with enhanced selectivity emerging through process integration. MF and UF can thus be repositioned as strategic fractionation interfaces within integrated treatment systems supporting circular economy-oriented wastewater management.
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.