Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39385262›Full record

ReviewTropical medicine and health2024

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) practices in Africa: exploring the effects on public health and sustainable development plans.

Olalekan John Okesanya, Gilbert Eshun, Bonaventure Michael Ukoaka, Emery Manirambona, Olaleke Noah Olabode, Ridwan Olamilekan Adesola, Inibehe Ime Okon, Safayet Jamil, Amandeep Singh, Don Eliseo Lucero-Prisno and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tropical medicine and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors.

Olalekan John OkesanyaDepartment of Medical Laboratory Science, Neuropsychiatric Hospital, Aro, Abeokuta, Nigeria.
Gilbert EshunSeventh Day Adventist Hospital, Agona-Asamang, Ghana.
Bonaventure Michael UkoakaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja, Nigeria.
Emery ManirambonaResearch Unit, Global Health Focus, Gitega, Burundi.
Olaleke Noah OlabodeDepartment of Medical Laboratory Science, Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex, Ile Ife, Osun State, Nigeria.
Ridwan Olamilekan AdesolaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Inibehe Ime OkonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Hospital of the Babcock University, Ilisan Remo, Ogun State, Nigeria.
Safayet JamilDepartment of Public Health, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, 1216, Bangladesh. safayet241-41-019@diu.edu.bd.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2313-4920
Amandeep SinghDepartment of Pharmaceutics, ISF College of Pharmacy, Moga, Punjab, 142001, India.
Don Eliseo Lucero-PrisnoDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Habib Mohammad AliDepartment of Media Studies and Journalism, University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh (ULAB), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
A B M Alauddin ChowdhuryDepartment of Public Health, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, 1216, Bangladesh.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuboptimal water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) practices constitute a serious public health risk, affecting one-third of the world's population. Remarkable progress has been made to improve WASH; however, challenges remain, with rapid population growth adding pressure on WASH systems. This study explores the current state of WASH practices and diseases in Africa, identifies challenges, and proposes public health recommendations for sustainable implementation. MAIN BODY: The staggering burden of WASH-related diseases in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly in Africa, threatens public health, with millions of deaths and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) attributed to poor WASH practices annually. Notable challenges plaguing WASH practices in the region include poverty, malnutrition, poor data reporting, illiteracy, climate change, and poor healthcare financing. This results in adverse health consequences, including waterborne infections like cholera, typhoid, dysentery, and diarrheal diseases. Additionally, neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) such as intestinal worms, schistosomiasis, trachoma, lost productivity, and environmental pollution from soil and underground water contamination have been implicated. Geographical disparities, cultural norms, and inadequate funding further complicate efforts to improve WASH infrastructure and practices. Globally concerted efforts are required to address these issues and permit WASH practices to protect human health by preventing infectious diseases and contributing to economic growth. Strong financial frameworks, skills training, and tools like WASH Fit are recommended for a stronger WASH approach in Africa.

conclusionThe consequences of poor WASH extend beyond public health, impacting economic growth, gender equality, and environmental sustainability. WaterAid's policy recommendations prioritizing government administration, institutional capacity enhancement, and more financial resources are expedient.

Indexed as

AfricaPublic healthSustainable Development GoalsWater, sanitation, and hygiene, WASH

Identifiers

PMID39385262
PMCPMC11463047

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.