Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42738748›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2026

Molecular Insights into Adsorption Mechanisms of Micro- and Nanoplastics on Effective Adsorbent Materials.

Angelo Fenti, Pasquale Iovino

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (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.

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

2 authors.

Angelo FentiDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4679-7970
Pasquale IovinoDepartment of Environmental, Biological and Pharmaceutical Science and Technologies, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 81100 Caserta, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3614-2978

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Existing reviews on micro- and nanoplastic (MNP) removal from water rarely link adsorbent structural features to the molecular interactions governing removal performance. This review addresses this gap by examining MNP adsorption from a mechanism-oriented perspective, mapping six canonical interaction pathways across five adsorbent classes. Adsorption emerges as a system-dependent process governed by the interplay between polymer properties and surface chemistry rather than by the material alone. Interactions such as π-π stacking and hydrophobic affinity dominate for non-functionalized polymers on carbon-rich surfaces, while electrostatic forces and hydrogen bonding become more relevant for oxidised particles. Pore structure becomes significant when particle size and porosity match, whereas chemisorption provides a stronger and faster pathway in systems containing reactive metal sites. Across material classes, differences relate more closely to scalability and sustainability than to intrinsic adsorption capacity. Bio-based materials offer a favourable balance between performance and practical implementation, while more advanced systems provide greater control but remain limited by synthesis complexity. Laboratory capacities often overestimate real performance, and removal efficiency in complex matrices is a more reliable metric. Future progress will depend on improved standardisation, integration with modelling, and validation under realistic conditions to support the transition from laboratory studies to practical applications.

Indexed as

adsorbent materialsadsorption mechanismsmicroplasticsnanoplasticswastewater treatmentwater remediation

Identifiers

PMID42738748
PMCPMC13567691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.