ArticleEnvironmental engineering science2021
Global Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Approaches: Anthropological Contributions and Future Directions for Engineering.
Article in Environmental engineering science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating behavioural science and design thinking to develop a water treatment innovation in Malawi healthcare: a case study of the intervention design process.Global health action · 2026Article
- The Impact of Rapid Handpump Repairs on Diarrhea Morbidity in Children: Cross-Sectional Study in Kwale County, Kenya.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Anaerobic Digestion as a Core Technology in Addressing the Global Sanitation Crisis: Challenges and Opportunities.Environmental science & technology · 2023Review
- Risk of Gastroenteritis from Swimming at a Wastewater-Impacted Tropical Beach Varies across Localized Scales.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2023Article
- Global Environmental Engineering for and with Historically Marginalized Communities.Environmental engineering science · 2021Article
- Using Intersectionality to Identify Gendered Barriers to Health-Seeking for Febrile Illness in Agro-Pastoralist Settings in Tanzania.Frontiers in global women's health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anthropologists contribute key insights toward a comprehensive understanding of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) as a multidimensional, multiscalar, and culturally embedded phenomenon. Yet, these insights have yet to be sufficiently operationalized and implemented in WASH development and wider WASH access-related paradigms. Ensuring WASH security requires a comprehensive approach to identifying both human health risk and environmental impact of WASH-related programs and strategies. It requires an understanding of how sanitation is integrated into households and communities and how individuals within particular cultural contexts practice sanitation and hygiene. This work facilitates that goal by outlining the major contributions of anthropology and allied social sciences to WASH, as well as outlining key considerations for future work and collaboration. We identify six major themes that, if applied in future engineering approaches, will more equitably integrate stakeholders and multiple vantage points in the successful implementation of WASH projects for marginalized and diverse groups. These include a critical understanding of previous approaches, culturally aware interventions, capacity building that considers (un)intended impact, co-created technology, collaboration between fields such as anthropology and engineering, and challenge-ready initiatives that respond to historic and emergent social and environmental inequity.
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.