Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35917339›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Barriers and facilitators to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) practices in Southern Africa: A scoping review.

Nkeka P Tseole, Tafadzwa Mindu, Chester Kalinda, Moses J Chimbari

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Exploring the Impact of Traditional Practices onInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Nkeka P TseoleSchool of Nursing and Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard Campus, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3224-9698
Tafadzwa MinduSchool of Nursing and Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Howard Campus, Durban, South Africa.
Chester KalindaBill and Joyce Cummings Institute of Global Health, University of Global Health Equity (UGHE), Kigali, Rwanda.
Moses J ChimbariDepartment of Behavioural Science, Medical and Health Sciences, Great Zimbabwe University, Masvingo, Zimbabwe.
University of KwaZulu-Natal · ZAGreat Zimbabwe University · ZWUniversity of Global Health Equity · RW

Funding

Department of Health 16/136/33
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A healthy and a dignified life experience requires adequate water, sanitation, and hygiene (WaSH) coverage. However, inadequate WaSH resources remain a significant public health challenge in many communities in Southern Africa. A systematic search of peer-reviewed journal articles from 2010 -May 2022 was undertaken on Medline, PubMed, EbscoHost and Google Scholar from 2010 to May 2022 was searched using combinations of predefined search terms with Boolean operators. Eighteen peer-reviewed articles from Southern Africa satisfied the inclusion criteria for this review. The general themes that emerged for both barriers and facilitators included geographical inequalities, climate change, investment in WaSH resources, low levels of knowledge on water borne-diseases and ineffective local community engagement. Key facilitators to improved WaSH practices included improved WaSH infrastructure, effective local community engagement, increased latrine ownership by individual households and the development of social capital. Water and sanitation are critical to ensuring a healthy lifestyle. However, many people and communities in Southern Africa still lack access to safe water and improved sanitation facilities. Rural areas are the most affected by barriers to improved WaSH facilities due to lack of WaSH infrastructure compared to urban settings. Our review has shown that, the current WaSH conditions in Southern Africa do not equate to the improved WaSH standards described in SDG 6 on ensuring access to water and sanitation for all. Key barriers to improved WaSH practices identified include rurality, climate change, low investments in WaSH infrastructure, inadequate knowledge on water-borne illnesses and lack of community engagement.

Indexed as

SanitationWaterAfrica, SouthernHumansHygieneWater SupplyWater

Identifiers

PMID35917339
PMCPMC9345477
OpenAlexW4289524784

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.