Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28903743›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2017

A socio-ecological analysis of barriers to the adoption, sustainablity and consistent use of sanitation facilities in rural Ethiopia.

Fikralem Alemu, Abera Kumie, Girmay Medhin, Teshome Gebre, Phoebe Godfrey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Adapting Translational Research Methods to Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Review
  16. Factors Associated with Levels of Latrine Completion and Consequent Latrine Use in Northern Ghana.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  17. 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

5 authors.

Fikralem AlemuEthiopian Institute of Water Resources, Water and Public Health program, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. fikeralemme@yahoo.com.
Abera KumieSchool of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Girmay MedhinAklilu Lemma Institute of Pathobiology, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Teshome GebreInternational Trachoma Initiative, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Phoebe GodfreyDepartment of Sociology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite evidence showing that access to and use of improved sanitation is associated with healthier households and communities, barriers influencing the adoption and sustainablity of sanitation facilities remain unclear. We conducted a qualitative case study to explore barriers influencing the adoption, sustainablity and consistent use of sanitation facilities in rural Ethiopia.

methodsA qualitative study was conducted in the rural district of Becho, in central Ethiopia, from June to August 2016. A socio-ecological model and Integrated Behavioural Model (IBM) for a Water Hygiene and Sanitation (WASH) framework were employed to design the study and analyse data. A total of 10 in-depth interviews (IDI) were conducted with latrine adopters (n = 3), latrine non-adopters (n = 3), health extension workers (n = 3) and the district WASH coordinator (n = 1). Eight Focus Group Discussions (FGD) were undertaken with 75 participants, of which 31 were women. The FGDs and IDIs were tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and translated into English. The analysis was supported using Nvivo version 10 software.

resultsBarriers to sustained adoption and use of sanitation facilities were categorized into 1) individual level factors (e.g., past latrine experience, lack of demand and perceived high cost to improved latrines), 2) household level factors (e.g., unaffordability, lack of space and absence of a physically strong family member), 3) community level factors (e.g., lack of access to public latrines, lack of shared rules against open defecation, lack of financial access for the poor), and 4) societal level factors (e.g., lack of strong local leadership, flooding, soil conditions, lack of appropriate sanitation technology, lack of promotion and demand creation for improved latrines).

conclusionThe use of the socio-ecological model and IBM-WASH framework helped to achieve a better understanding of multi-level and multi-dimensional barriers to sustained latrine adoption. The results indicate that there is a need to consider interventions that address multi-level factors concurrently.

Indexed as

HygieneRural PopulationToilet FacilitiesAdolescentAdultEcologyEthiopiaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSanitationSocioeconomic FactorsYoung AdultAdoption of latrineBarriersEthiopiaRuralSanitationUse of latrine

Identifiers

PMID28903743
PMCPMC5598066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.