ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Comparative Analysis of Porous Alkali-Activated Composites Modified with Commercial and Laboratory-Prepared Phase Change Materials.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study presents a comparative evaluation of geopolymer foams incorporating either commercially available shape-stabilized phase change materials (PCMs) or laboratory-developed diatomite-paraffin PCM granules with controlled particle size fractions ranging from <1.6 mm to >2.5 mm. All PCM variants were incorporated at a constant dosage of 7.5 wt.% to isolate the influence of PCM type on the properties of the resulting composites. The commercial materials comprised PX-4, PX15, and PX20 (Rubitherm Technologies GmbH), whereas the laboratory-developed PCM consisted of paraffin immobilized within a porous diatomite matrix to produce granular shape-stabilized composites. The experimental program included the determination of bulk density, total porosity, pore size distribution, thermal conductivity (λ), thermal resistance (R), specific heat capacity (Cp), and compressive strength. The pore structure was characterized by mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP), while the morphology and dispersion of PCM particles within the geopolymer matrix were investigated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). All mixtures were produced using the same alkali-activated matrix and identical curing conditions, with the PCM content maintained at 7.5 wt.%. The results demonstrated that the type of PCM significantly affected the microstructure and thermophysical performance of the geopolymer foams. The laboratory-developed diatomite-paraffin PCM provided the most favorable thermal insulation performance, exhibiting the lowest thermal conductivity (0.095 W/m·K) together with the highest thermal resistance (0.278 m
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.