ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Sustainable Materials: A Conceptual Gap in Definition.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The term "sustainable material" has become widely used in materials science, yet its conceptual foundation remains inconsistently interpreted. Despite major progress in sustainability assessment, circularity metrics, life cycle analysis, and policy-oriented frameworks, sustainability is still commonly treated as an intrinsic material property instead of a multidimensional and context-dependent outcome. This perspective addresses this unresolved conceptual gap by critically distinguishing widely used but often interchangeably applied terms such as bio-based, recyclable, biodegradable, circular, green, renewable, and sustainable materials. It is argued that none of these descriptors alone can define sustainable materials, since each captures a specific or only a limited aspect of material behavior while overlooking interacting factors, including processing conditions, infrastructure, embodied impacts, end-of-life management, and application-dependent constraints. Accordingly, the present work challenges binary classification of materials as "sustainable" or "non-sustainable" and proposes a shift toward a more integrated and context- dependent interpretation of sustainable materials. By clarifying the boundaries and limitations of existing terminology, this perspective aims to strengthen scientific communication, improve sustainability-oriented materials selection, and motivate the development of more structured multidimensional frameworks for future "sustainable material" classification.
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.