ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2016
Assessing the Health Impact of Water Quality Interventions in Low-Income Settings: Concerns Associated with Blinded Trials and the Need for Objective Outcomes.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Water Quality, Sanitation, Handwashing, and Nutritional Interventions on Enteric Infections in Rural Zimbabwe: The Sanitation Hygiene Infant Nutrition Efficacy (SHINE) Trial.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2020Trial
- A Stepped Wedge Cluster-Randomized Trial Assessing the Impact of a Riverbank Filtration Intervention to Improve Access to Safe Water on Health in Rural India.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Use of Serologic Responses against Enteropathogens to Assess the Impact of a Point-of-Use Water Filter: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Western Province, Rwanda.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2017Trial
- Article
- Impact of integrated water, sanitation, hygiene, health and nutritional interventions on diarrhoea disease epidemiology and microbial quality of water in a resource-constrained setting in Kenya: A controlled intervention study.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2022Article
- Adapting a safe water storage container to improve household stored water quality in rural Burkina Faso: a cluster randomized trial.Journal of water, sanitation, and hygiene for development : a journal of the International Water Association · 2021Article
- Fecal Indicator Bacteria along Multiple Environmental Transmission Pathways (Water, Hands, Food, Soil, Flies) and Subsequent Child Diarrhea in Rural Bangladesh.Environmental science & technology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA dramatic disparity between the results of blinded versus open trial designs has raised questions about the effectiveness of water quality interventions and other environmental interventions to prevent diarrhea, a leading killer of young children in low-income countries.
objectivesWe summarize the results of blinded versus open trials of water quality interventions, describe evidence from a recent placebo-controlled trial in India suggesting that control households were put at risk from their participation, and suggest alternatives to blinded trials that could resolve continued uncertainty about the magnitude of the protective effect of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) interventions without presenting ethical questions. DISCUSSION: Concerns about reporting bias in open trial designs continue to cause uncertainty about the effectiveness of WASH interventions. However, evidence suggests that despite instructions to the contrary, placebos may encourage control group participants in blinded trials to cease practicing traditional water treatment practices in the mistaken belief that they are protected by an active intervention. Although objective outcomes such as pathogen incrimination, seroconversion, biomarkers, and anthropometry can be helpful, these are often costly, nonspecific, and unsuitable for evaluating programmatic interventions.
conclusionsUnless researchers can be assured that a placebo will not cause those in a control group to change their behavior in a manner that increases their risk, it is incumbent on researchers to use alternatives. Validated objective measures are needed for assessing the health impact of WASH interventions that are reliable, affordable, and suitable both for research and program evaluation. CITATION: Clasen T, Boisson S. 2016. Assessing the health impact of water quality interventions in low-income settings: concerns associated with blinded trials and the need for objective outcomes. Environ Health Perspect 124:886-889; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510532.
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.