Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42122693›Full record

ArticlePolymers2026

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Mechanical Recyclability Assessment of Different Types of PET Packaging Waste.

Giusy Santomasi, Francesco Todaro, Michele Notarnicola, Eggo Ulphard Thoden van Velzen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Giusy SantomasiDepartment of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry (DICATECh), Polytechnic University of Bari, Via E. Orabona n.4, I-70125 Bari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9876-7813
Francesco TodaroDepartment of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry (DICATECh), Polytechnic University of Bari, Via E. Orabona n.4, I-70125 Bari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8496-6678
Michele NotarnicolaDepartment of Civil, Environmental, Land, Building Engineering and Chemistry (DICATECh), Polytechnic University of Bari, Via E. Orabona n.4, I-70125 Bari, Italy.
Eggo Ulphard Thoden van VelzenWageningen Food & Biobased Research, Wageningen University & Research, Bornse Weilanden 9, 6708 WG Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2174-3220

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management of plastic packaging waste needs to be optimized to improve recycling rates. In this article, fourteen categories of non-bottle polyethylene terephthalate (PET) packages were mechanically recycled at laboratory bench scale; the generated data were assessed using a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach to identify the categories most suited for the mechanical recycling process from social, technical and legislative viewpoints. Recycling yields varied between 75% and 92% across the 14 categories. The intrinsic viscosity (IV) values of the produced recycled PET (rPET) corresponded to molecular weights ranging from 28,000 to 35,000 g/mol. The MCDA recyclability assessment showed that 7 of the 14 categories (accounting for 72% of the sorted products by mass flow) are often composed of multiple, inseparable materials, resulting in the lowest-quality rPET. Furthermore, only 4 categories (approximately 28% of the categories) were found suitable for closed-loop mechanical recycling. The stakeholders involved in the PET packaging value chain could use these results to support decision-making and the development of a well-organized framework to valorize even the most complex types of plastic waste.

Indexed as

end of waste routesmechanical recyclingmulti-criteria analysisrecyclability assessmentrPET

Identifiers

PMID42122693
PMCPMC13166004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.