ArticleScientific reports2026
Optimization of glass fiber reinforced MICP cured coastal sediments.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study integrates glass fibers (GF) with Microbial Induced Carbonate Precipitation (MICP) to enhance the consolidation of coastal dredged sediments (CDS) and reduce treatment costs. Response Surface Methodology (RSM) was employed to optimize four parameters-moisture content, reaction time, fiber length, and fiber content-using unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and calcium carbonate content (CC) as response variables. The developed regression models exhibited high predictive accuracy (R2 0.98). Moisture content and reaction time were identified as the most influential factors for UCS and CC, respectively. Under the optimal conditions (moisture content 39.9%, reaction time 4 days, fiber length 5.6 mm, and fiber content 2.44%), the predicted UCS and CC reached 4.29 MPa and 3.21%, respectively, which closely matched experimental values. SEM and XRD analyses revealed that GF enhanced the formation of a CaCO
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.