ArticleACS omega2026
Research on the Preparation of Carbon-Negative Backfill Materials via Enhanced Carbon Sequestration Using Coal-Based Solid Waste.
Article in ACS omega, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To tackle the dual challenges of large-scale disposal of coal-based solid waste and safe backfilling of goafs, while aligning with the "dual carbon" goals and enhancing mining area safety, carbon-negative backfilling technology has emerged as a key research hotspot in the field of green mining. However, it still faces issues such as low carbon sequestration efficiency and difficulty in additive recovery. In this study, two methods (NaOH and glycine leaching) were used to enhance the carbon sequestration capacity of coal-based solid waste, and their performance differences under optimal reaction conditions were systematically compared. The experimental results showed that the carbon sequestration capacity of the NaOH alkali activation group was only 26.96 g/kg, while that of the glycine leaching group reached 78.85 g/kg, which was significantly higher than that of the control group and the alkali activation group. Glycine rapidly captures CO
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.