ReviewRe/views in environmental science and bio/technology2026
Dewatering assessment of sewage sludge: a remaining challenge.
Review in Re/views in environmental science and bio/technology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Improved sewage sludge dewaterability saves costs in biosolids transport and disposal, making reliable dewaterability assessment essential for both research and full-scale process evaluation. However, laboratory-based indexes commonly used to predict dewatering performance often show limited correspondence with full-scale results. Nonetheless, indexes such as capillary suction time (CST), sedimentation and centrifugation methods, specific resistance to filtration (SRF), and mixed dead-end techniques show biases when trying to resemble full-scale results. In our present article, we pose that lack of predictability originates from overlooking all the phenomena involved in the dewatering process. Four critical phenomena are identified to occur during dewaterability: (1) mixing of sludge and conditioner; (2) suspension destabilisation; (3) flocs formation, and (4) compression and expression. By systematically evaluating widely used laboratory indexes this review shows that these methods capture only part of the dewatering process and generally fail to represent the compression and expression stages that ultimately determine the ultimate achievable solids concentration. The analysis highlights sludge compressibility as a critical factor limiting the predictive capacity of conventional indexes. Based on this synthesis, centrifugation, dead-end filtration, and combined centrifugation-filtration approaches are identified as more suitable methods for laboratory-scale assessment because they better represent the compression behaviour of sludge. The review provides a conceptual framework linking dewatering phenomena with experimental assessment methods, supporting the development of improved evaluation strategies and facilitating the testing of emerging, environmentally friendly conditioning technologies. Graphical abstract:
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.