ArticleBMC public health2025
Open defecation free status and its determinants in rural Uganda: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGlobally, the progress to attain the open defecation free (ODF) environment has remained very slow. This study examined context specific factors influencing household open defecation free status in Uganda.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in Kabale district in southwestern Uganda and 492 participants were randomly selected at household level. Data was obtained through conducting a face-to-face interview using the mobile data collection software KoBoCollect v2021.3.4 installed on tablet devices. Using the Firth's penalized logistic regression, bivariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to determine if there existed significant associations between the outcome Household Open Defecation (HODF) status and independent variables. Variables with P < 0.2 at bivariate analysis comprised the global model for the multivariate analysis.
resultsThe average age of the participants was 49 (SD 23.4) years. Most (67.68%) of the study participants, were females while 144 (29.27%) of the participants had no formal education. The households that were open defecation free were as few as 15 (3%). At multivariable analysis, gender of the participants, remembering handwashing, latrine and household cleanliness factors were significantly association with HODF status. Male participants had more odds of having open defecation free households (aOR: 3.89; 95% CI: 1.26-12.06) compared to female participants. Households with clean compounds, with latrines not having their holes soiled with feces and where respondents always remembered to wash hands after visiting latrine had high odds of being open defecation free (aOR: 3.15; 95% CI: 1.03-9.66, aOR: 10.56; 95% CI: 1.87-59.63 and aOR: 3.96; 95% CI: 1.24-12.68, respectively).
conclusionThe prevalence of HODF was very low and factors associated with it were; the gender of the participants, the latrine and household cleanliness and the behavioral factor of remembering handwashing. We propose behavioral change interventions that empower communities to adapt improved sanitation behavior, such as Community Led Total Sanitation and Hygiene (CLTSH) in order to increase households with the Open Defecation Free status.
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.