Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35033992›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of hygiene and environmental health2022

Adaptation in rural water, sanitation, and hygiene programs: A qualitative study in Nepal.

Darcy M Anderson, Ankush Kumar Gupta, Sarah A Birken, Zoe Sakas, Matthew C Freeman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of hygiene and environmental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Darcy M AndersonThe Water Institute, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 135 Dauer Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: darcy.anderson@unc.edu.
Ankush Kumar GuptaNepal Health Research Council, Ramshah Path, Kathmandu, P.O.Box 7626, Nepal.
Sarah A BirkenDepartment of Implementation Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, 475 Vine Street, Winston-Salem, NC, 27101, USA; Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC, 27157, USA.
Zoe SakasGangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd. NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Matthew C FreemanGangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd. NE, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Emory University · USAtrium Health Wake Forest Baptist · USNepal Health Research Council · NPUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Biostatstics for Research in Environmental HealthT32ES007018 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Stephanie Engel, Rebecca Fry · 1985 to 2026
$31.3M
NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES007018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptations are modifications made to programming to improve effectiveness or contextual fit, and are important for program improvement. However, adaptations can be detrimental if they do not preserve an intervention's underlying theory of change. We present a case study of 45 adaptations made to rural WaSH programming in Nepal, identified through qualitative interviews with implementers conducted in June through August 2019. For each adaptation, we characterized its target outcomes and implementers' motivations for making the adaptation, and we assessed the adaptation's intended and unintended effects on program quality. Participants described adaptations to both interventions (e.g., changes to hygiene promotion messages) and implementation strategies (e.g., sanctions to enforce toilet construction, such as denying work permits to households without a toilet). Adoption was the most common target outcome, specifically increasing toilet construction. Other target outcomes included feasibility of program delivery, acceptability of messages or WaSH products, reach of program activities in the community, and sustainability. Implementers were commonly motivated by intense pressure to meet national open defecation free targets. Most adaptations achieved their target outcomes. However, sanctions adaptations had substantial unintended negative effects. Implementers reported that sanctions were unpopular with communities and had poor sustainability. In contrast, non-sanctions adaptations that targeted outcomes of feasibility, acceptability, and sustainability had few unintended negative consequences. Our findings suggest that adaptations to promote rapid adoption of toilet construction do not consistently achieve sustained behavior change. Furthermore, adaptations to improve feasibility of program delivery or cost and acceptability of WaSH products can indirectly improve adoption even when it is not an explicit target outcome.

Indexed as

SanitationWaterHumansHygieneNepalRural PopulationWaterAdaptationCommunity-led total sanitation (CLTS)Consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR)HygieneImplementation scienceSanitationWaSHWater

Identifiers

PMID35033992
PMCPMC8821331
OpenAlexW4206451660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.