Cited by 1,246Heavy Metal Pollution RemediationAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removalEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 231 of the 231 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Heavy metal water pollution: A fresh look about hazards, novel and conventional remediation methods

Zamora-Ledezma, Camilo, Negrete-Bolagay, Daniela, Figueroa, Freddy, Zamora-Ledezma, Ezequiel, Ni, Ming, Alexis, Frank, Guerrero, Victor H.·2021·Environmental Technology & Innovation

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eti.2021.101504

Cites

231 of 231 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Bhattacharya, 2013, Role of nanotechnology in water treatment and purification: Potential applications and implications, Int. J. Chem. Sci. Technol., 3, 59
  2. Chibueze, 2016, Bioremediation techniques – classification based on site of application: principles, advantages, limitations and prospects, World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol, 32, 1
  3. Devi, 2020, Concept and application of phytoremediation in the fight of heavy metal toxicity, J. Pharm. Sci. Res., 12, 2020
  4. Gunatilake, 2015, Methods of removing heavy metals from, J. Multidiscip. Eng. Sci. Stud. Ind. Wastewater, 1, 12
  5. Jarre, 2021, Preliminary characterization of the rice husk ash from the Manabí province for its use in concrete, Rev. Tec. Ing. Univ. Zulia, 44, 44
  6. Joshi, 2017, Biosorption: A review on heavy metal toxicity and advances of biosorption on conventional methods, J. Chem. Chem. Sci., 7, 714
  7. Kaur, 2016, Spectroscopic techniques and electrochemical sensors technologies for heavy metal ions detection: A review, Int. J. Adv. Eng. Manag. Sci., 2, 1622
  8. Tchounwou, 2012, Molecular, clinical and environmental toxicicology volume 3: Environmental toxicology, molecular, Clin. Environ. Toxicol.
  9. Villarín, 2020, Paradigm shifts and current challenges in wastewater management, J. Hazard. Mater., 390, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.122139 · DOI
  10. Voica, 2012, ICP-MS Determinations of heavy metals in surface waters from transylvania, Rom. Rep. Phys., 57, 1184
  11. 2017, Water, 165

Metadata

Authors
Zamora-Ledezma, C., Negrete-Bolagay, D., Figueroa, F., Zamora-Ledezma, E., Ni, M., Alexis, F., & Guerrero, V. H.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Yachay Tech (EC)
  • Universidad Técnica de Manabí (EC)
Venue
Environmental Technology & Innovation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-05
Volume
22
Pages
101504
ISSN
2352-1864 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3137542033
Cited by
1,246
References
231
Citations by year
2026: 173 · 2025: 305 · 2024: 319 · 2023: 259 · 2022: 155 · 2021: 35
FWCI
57.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Environmental Technology & Innovation (publishedVersion)
Funders
Escuela Politécnica Nacional (PIGR-19-05)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Heavy Metal Pollution Remediation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental remediation with nanomaterials
Keywords
heavy metal contamination, water pollution, heavy metal removal, lead, cadmium, mercury, arsenic, human health risk, environmental risk, adsorption, nanostructured materials, nanotechnology, heavy metal detection, anthropogenic pollution sources, industrial wastewater, water treatment products

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