Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38939947›Full record

ArticleJournal of global health2024

Water, sanitation, and intimate partner violence: Insights from Kibra Slums, Nairobi.

Stephen Ombija, Hesborn Wao, Tammary Esho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Stephen Ombija *Amref International University (AMIU), Nairobi, Kenya.
Hesborn Wao *African Population and Health Research Centre (APHRC), Nairobi, Kenya.
Tammary EshoAmref International University (AMIU), Nairobi, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) poses significant health and social challenges for women, particularly in slums characterised by limited access to basic amenities like water and sanitation facilities. This study aimed to investigate the association between accessibility of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) facilities and IPV among women in Kibra, Nairobi county, Kenya. Methods: A cross-sectional study design utilising a modified Demographic Health and Survey questionnaire was conducted among women aged 15-49 in Kibra slums. Data on water and sanitation accessibility and IPV experiences were collected from 1068 participants. Quantitative analysis by use of logistic regression, was conducted to assess associations between WASH accessibility and IPV. Results: Among the participants, 64.0% reported experiences of IPV. Women who had access to water inside household; adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.44 (95% CI = 0.31-0.64) and sanitation AOR = 0.57 (95% CI = 0.37-0.88) had decreased odds of experiencing IPV whereas reliance on external water sources such as outside pipes AOR = 18.18 (95% CI = 8.62-38.33) or vendors AOR = 14.42 (95% CI = 6.88-30.24) had heightened IPV vulnerability. Conclusions: Access to clean water and sanitation is associated with reduced likelihood of women experiencing IPV in slums whereas access to water outside household is associated with increased likelihood of experiencing IPV. Connecting households with water to improve access and construction of adequate sanitation facilities may protect women against intimate partner violence in slums.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolencePoverty AreasSanitationWater SupplyAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansKenyaMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38939947
PMCPMC11211967

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.