Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26572868›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2016

Consistency of Use and Effectiveness of Household Water Treatment Practices Among Urban and Rural Populations Claiming to Treat Their Drinking Water at Home: A Case Study in Zambia.

Ghislaine Rosa, Paul Kelly, Thomas Clasen

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Ghislaine RosaFaculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Tropical Gastroenterology and Nutrition Group, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Zambia School of Medicine, Lusaka, Zambia; Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia ghislaine.rosa@lshtm.ac.uk.
Paul KellyFaculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Tropical Gastroenterology and Nutrition Group, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Zambia School of Medicine, Lusaka, Zambia; Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Thomas ClasenFaculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Tropical Gastroenterology and Nutrition Group, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Zambia School of Medicine, Lusaka, Zambia; Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Household water treatment (HWT) can improve drinking water quality and prevent disease, if used correctly and consistently. While international monitoring suggests that 1.8 billion people practice HWT, these estimates are based on household surveys that may overstate the level of consistent use and do not address microbiological effectiveness. We sought to examine how HWT is practiced among households identified as HWT users according to international monitoring standards. Case studies were conducted in urban and rural Zambia. After a baseline survey (urban: 203 households, rural: 276 households) to identify HWT users, 95 urban and 82 rural households were followed up for 6 weeks. Consistency of HWT reporting was low; only 72.6% of urban and 50.0% of rural households reported to be HWT users in the subsequent visit. Similarly, availability of treated water was low, only 23.3% and 4.2% of urban and rural households, respectively, had treated water on all visits. Drinking water was significantly worse than source water in both settings. Only 19.6% of urban and 2.4% of rural households had drinking water free of thermotolerant coliforms on all visits. Our findings raise questions about the value of the data gathered through the international monitoring of HWT practices as predictors of water quality in the home.

Indexed as

Rural PopulationUrban PopulationDrinking WaterFamily CharacteristicsHumansSocioeconomic FactorsWater MicrobiologyWater PurificationWater QualityZambiaDrinking Water

Identifiers

PMID26572868
PMCPMC4751932

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.