Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42611231›Full record

ArticleACS nano2026

Nanomaterials Electrochemistry: Insights for Materials Scientists and Electrochemists.

Mario Urso, Mahnaz Azimzadeh Sani, Richard G Compton, Kristina Tschulik, Martin Pumera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS nano, 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

5 authors.

Mario UrsoDipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia "Ettore Majorana, Università degli Studi di Catania, Catania95123, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7993-8138
Mahnaz Azimzadeh SaniAnalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum44780, Germany.
Richard G ComptonPhysical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, OX1 3QZOxford, Great Britain.ORCID 0000-0001-9841-5041
Kristina TschulikAnalytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum44780, Germany.
Martin PumeraFuture Energy and Innovation Laboratory, Central European Institute of Technology, Brno University of Technology, Purkynova 123, 61200Brno, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0001-5846-2951

Funding

European Regional Development Fund CZ.02.01.01/00/22_008/0004587German Research Council (DFG) 388390466 - TRR247 - A09 - B09Grantov? Agentura Cesk? Republiky 25-15484XHorizon 2020 European Commission (EC) 949724
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electrochemistry is a key enabler of modern technology, underpinning materials processing, chemical synthesis, and energy storage and conversion. Electrochemistry requires electrodes─conducting materials to external circuit. However, the actual composition of these electrodes is often far removed from that assumed in electrochemical equations─atomically flat homogeneous surfaces. Electrochemical response of nanomaterials arises from a complex interplay of composition, morphology, structure, defects, and surface properties, coupled with mass transport. Failing to fully account for this complexity can lead to ambiguous interpretations of electrochemical activity and reaction mechanisms, particularly at the nanoscale where apparent activity may reflect measurement and transport artifacts rather than intrinsic material properties. This perspective critically examines common sources of ambiguity that emerge when studying nanostructured and heterogeneous materials in electrochemical environments. Drawing on insights from both materials science and electrochemistry, we highlight how factors such as nanomaterial transformation, impurities, electrode architecture, and transport limitations can complicate mechanistic understanding and hinder reliable comparison across the literature. Particular emphasis is placed on the need for rigorous nanomaterial characterization, careful experimental design, and transparent reporting practices, especially in the context of increasingly data-driven research. At the same time, we show that classical electrochemical models, which assume well-defined and homogeneous molecular systems, are not directly transferable to real, complex nanostructured electrode materials. By outlining practical considerations and conceptual pitfalls, this work aims to support more reliable, reproducible, and meaningful investigations at the crossroad of materials science and electrochemistry, highlighting how the nanoscale introduces challenges that require particularly careful experimental design and interpretation. We hope that electrochemists and materials scientists will learn from each other to move this key field forward.

Indexed as

electrocatalysiselectrode architectureimpuritiesmass transportnanomaterial transformationoperando characterizationreproducibility in electrochemistrystructure−activity relationships

Identifiers

PMID42611231
PMCPMC13492388

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.