ArticleiScience2026
Microwave-assisted electro-peroxone process for rapid removal of high-concentration recalcitrant dye solutions.
Article in iScience, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Azo dyes are persistent pollutants commonly found in industrial wastewaters. This study evaluated the microwave-electro-peroxone (MW-EP) process for degradation of Reactive Yellow 84 (RY84) and optimized the operating conditions, using the one-factor-at-a-time (OFAT) approach. The optimum conditions were an initial dye concentration of 300 mg/L, pH 6.5, current intensity of 400 mA, microwave power of 279 W, ozone flow rate of 0.288 g/h, and NaCl concentration of 0.035 M. Under these conditions, 91.36% dye removal was achieved within 17 min, with an energy consumption of 579.25 kWh/kg. Chemical oxygen demand (COD) and total organic carbon (TOC) removal efficiencies reached 75.3% and 55.8%, respectively. Scavenger experiments identified ȮH and
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.