Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33180832›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Household latrine utilization and associated factors in semi-urban areas of northeastern Ethiopia.

Deres Asnake, Metadel Adane

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Deres AsnakeQuality Improvement Unit, Woldia Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Woldia, Ethiopia.
Metadel AdaneDepartment of Environmental Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0002-7039-4768
Woldia University · ETWollo University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLatrine utilization is the actual behavior in a practice of regularly using existing latrines for safe disposal of excreta. Latrine utilization is a common problem in semi-urban areas of developing countries, including Ethiopia. Since the status of latrine utilization and associated factors among semi-urban areas of northeastern Ethiopia, including Alansha in South Wollo Zone is unknown, local data is needed in order to assess the need for planning of intervention programs for the improvement of latrine utilization to support consistent and sustained latrine utilization. This study is designed to address this knowledge gap.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted from February to March, 2019 among 401 systematically selected households. Data were collected by trained workers using a pre-tested, structured questionnaire via face-to-face interviews and on-the-spot observations of the latrines. A systematic random sampling method was used to select participant households. Data were entered using EpiData version 3.1 and exported to Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0 for data cleaning and analysis. The wealth index status of participants was estimated using principal component analysis. Data were analyzed using a binary logistic regression model at 95% confidence interval (CI). From the multivariable logistic regression analysis, variables with p-value < 0.05 were taken as statistically significant and independently associated with latrine utilization. Model fitness was checked using Hosmer-Lemeshow test.

resultWe found that the prevalence of latrine utilization among households was 71.8% (95% CI [67.5-76.1%]) while 28.2% (95% CI [23.9-32.5%]) did not utilize latrines. About one-fifth (21.7%) of participant households were found to have a pit latrine with slab and 78.3% (311) used pit latrines without slab. The hygienic condition of the majority (82.9%) of the latrines was dirty and only 17.1% clean. Household family size from one to three persons (AOR: 3.99, 95% CI [1.20-6.24]), presence of primary or secondary school student in a house (AOR: 2.33, 95% CI [1.42-3.83]), number of years since latrine was constructed (≥ 2 years) (AOR: 1.82, 95% CI [1.12-2.95]) and a frequency of daily cleaning of the latrine (AOR: 2.19, 95% CI [1.12-4.28]) were factors significantly associated with latrine utilization.

conclusionSeven out of ten households utilized a latrine. Factors significantly associated with latrine utilization were household family size from one to three persons, presence of primary or secondary school student in the house, time since household latrine had been constructed of two or more years and daily frequency of latrine cleaning. Therefore, it is recommended that measures to promote behavioral change towards further improvement in sustainable and consistent latrine utilization should be carried out based on the evidence of the determinant factors found in this study.

Indexed as

Family CharacteristicsToilet FacilitiesUrban PopulationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBehaviorCross-Sectional StudiesEthiopiaFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate Analysis

Identifiers

PMID33180832
PMCPMC7660512
OpenAlexW3106358934

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.