ArticleScientific reports2026
Experimental evaluation of eco-friendly exfoliation strategies for Tour-method graphene oxide.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The exfoliation of graphite oxide (GrO) represents a critical stage prior to processes such as the reduction or functionalisation of graphene oxide (GO), directly affecting its final properties. In particular, GrO synthesised by the Tour method, which offers advantages over conventional methods such as the Hummers method (higher safety, better oxidation degree and homogeneity of the material), has been scarcely studied in terms of the control of its specific surface area (SSA), a fundamental parameter for its performance in technological applications. In this work, the optimisation of the exfoliation process of GrO prepared by the Tour method is proposed through the systematic comparison of different eco-friendly techniques: ultrasonic bath, ultrasonic probe, ball milling and glucose-assisted ball milling. A rigorous Design of Experiments (DE) and a comprehensive statistical analysis were carried out, using carbon content, C (%), and SSA as main responses. In addition, complementary characterisations by X-ray diffraction (XRD, for number of stacked layers, "n", crystal size, L, and diffraction peak position, 2θ) were performed to deepen the structural analysis. The results reveal that ball milling without additives achieved the highest SSA (~ 71 m² g−1), followed by glucose-assisted milling (~ 54 m² g−1), while ultrasonic techniques offered significantly lower values (6–30 m² g−1). This study provides a solid and rigorous basis for understanding and optimizing the properties of GO according to the requirements of the specific applications for which it is intended and a study of the differences between ball milling and ultrasonic exfoliation in GO normally applied in graphite exfoliation.
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.