Cited by 290Microplastics and Plastic PollutionAnalytical chemistry methods developmentEnvironmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies

Analytical methodologies for monitoring micro(nano)plastics: Which are fit for purpose?

Renner, Gerrit, Schmidt, Torsten C., Schram, Jürgen·2018·Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.coesh.2017.11.001

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Renner, G., Schmidt, T. C., & Schram, J.
Affiliations
University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
Corresponding author
Renner, Gerrit
Venue
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-02
Volume
1
Pages
55-61
ISSN
2468-5844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2786404418
Cited by
290
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 12
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
Keywords
microplastics, nanoplastics, visual inspection, infrared microscopy, micro-Raman spectroscopy, chemical characterization, environmental monitoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review