SynthesisEnvironmental health perspectives2014
Enablers and barriers to large-scale uptake of improved solid fuel stoves: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Environmental health perspectives, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
92 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Adopting Clean Technologies to Climate Change Adaptation Strategies in Africa: a Systematic Literature Review.Environmental management · 2023Pooled it
- Indoor air pollution from solid fuel on children pneumonia in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Pooled it
- Implementing lung health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a FRESH AIR systematic review and meta-synthesis.The European respiratory journal · 2020Pooled it
- Community-Led Total Sanitation: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review of Evidence and Its Quality.Environmental health perspectives · 2018Pooled it
- What is the impact on health and wellbeing of interventions that foster respect and social inclusion in community-residing older adults? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.Systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Assessing Exposure to Household Air Pollution: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Carbon Monoxide as a Surrogate Measure of Particulate Matter.Environmental health perspectives · 2017Pooled it
- Type and extent of trans-disciplinary co-operation to improve food security, health and household environment in low and middle income countries: systematic review.BMC public health · 2016Pooled it
- Factors influencing household uptake of improved solid fuel stoves in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative systematic review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Pooled it
- Impact of the Wood-BurningEnvironmental health perspectives · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Pregnant Women's Exposure to Household Air Pollution in Rural Bangladesh: A Feasibility Study for Poriborton: The CHANge Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Enhancing LPG adoption in Ghana (ELAG): a factorial cluster-randomized controlled trial to Enhance LPG Adoption & Sustained use.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Low-smoke chulha in Indian slums: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.BMC public health · 2017Trial
- Biomonitoring Human Exposure to Household Air Pollution and Association with Self-reported Health Symptoms - A Stove Intervention Study in Peru.Environment international · 2016Trial
- The Cooking and Pneumonia Study (CAPS) in Malawi: A Nested Pilot of Photovoice Participatory Research Methodology.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Ghana randomized air pollution and health study (GRAPHS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials · 2015Trial
- Children's Respiratory Health After an Efficient Biomass Stove (Patsari) Intervention.EcoHealth · 2015Trial
32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlobally, 2.8 billion people rely on household solid fuels. Reducing the resulting adverse health, environmental, and development consequences will involve transitioning through a mix of clean fuels and improved solid fuel stoves (IS) of demonstrable effectiveness. To date, achieving uptake of IS has presented significant challenges.
objectivesWe performed a systematic review of factors that enable or limit large-scale uptake of IS in low- and middle-income countries.
methodsWe conducted systematic searches through multidisciplinary databases, specialist websites, and consulting experts. The review drew on qualitative, quantitative, and case studies and used standardized methods for screening, data extraction, critical appraisal, and synthesis. We summarized our findings as "factors" relating to one of seven domains-fuel and technology characteristics; household and setting characteristics; knowledge and perceptions; finance, tax, and subsidy aspects; market development; regulation, legislation, and standards; programmatic and policy mechanisms-and also recorded issues that impacted equity.
resultsWe identified 31 factors influencing uptake from 57 studies conducted in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. All domains matter. Although factors such as offering technologies that meet household needs and save fuel, user training and support, effective financing, and facilitative government action appear to be critical, none guarantee success: All factors can be influential, depending on context. The nature of available evidence did not permit further prioritization.
conclusionsAchieving adoption and sustained use of IS at a large scale requires that all factors, spanning household/community and program/societal levels, be assessed and supported by policy. We propose a planning tool that would aid this process and suggest further research to incorporate an evaluation of effectiveness.
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.