ArticleMembranes2026
Improved Removal of Neonicotinoid Insecticides from Real Water Matrices by Modified UF and NF Membranes.
Article in Membranes, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The removal of five neonicotinoid insecticides, acetamiprid, chlothianidin, imidacloprid, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam, was explored using various commercial ultrafiltration (MW, PT, and GK) and nanofiltration (HL) membranes provided by GE Osmonics Labstore. Several modification techniques have also been applied to one ultrafiltration membrane, including immersion in hot water, sodium hydroxide, and ethanol solutions, as well as interfacial polymerization with monomers such as polyethyleneimine and trimesoyl chloride, to improve micropollutant retention while maintaining adequate permeability. The results show that only immersion in ethanol (60% solution or absolute ethanol) improved membrane performance. Among the reagents and conditions tested for membrane surface modification via polymerization, the sequential application of polyethyleneimine, trimesoyl chloride, oven curing at 60 °C, followed by immersion in a glycerol solution was the most efficient. The optimal modified membrane was tested with real water matrices (two secondary effluents from wastewater treatment plants and a surface water sample) in which the neonicotinoids were dissolved. The modified ultrafiltration membrane showed higher retention (80-95%) than commercial ultrafiltration (15-60%) and levels similar to nanofiltration membranes (70-95%), demonstrating greater efficiency in retaining neonicotinoids under real water conditions, although the permeability was about half that of the commercial nanofiltration membrane. Therefore, this modification process is a promising alternative to commercial membranes for removing micropollutants from urban wastewater and should be considered.
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.