Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41595855›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025

Evaluating Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices Related to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH): A Case Study of Durban High Schools in South Africa.

Magareth Thulisile Ngcongo, Memory Tekere

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. 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

2 authors.

Magareth Thulisile NgcongoDepartment of Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Science Campus, P.O. Box X6, Florida 1710, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-4443-679X
Memory TekereDepartment of Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Science Campus, P.O. Box X6, Florida 1710, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-0606-7826

Funding

Mangosuthu University of Technology UCDG Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inadequate hygiene knowledge and poor sanitation practices remain key challenges to safe learning environments in South Africa, with 462 million learners attending schools without basic handwashing facilities and many schools failing to meet sanitation standards. Although national policies and infrastructure investments have improved water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services in some schools, access and behaviours remain uneven across socio-economic contexts. This study evaluated knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) related to WASH among 1200 learners from 40 high schools in Durban using a cross-sectional design and interviewer-administered questionnaires. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations, ANOVA, and multiple regression. The study addressed the research question: To what extent do learners' knowledge and attitudes predict hygiene practices across socio-economic contexts? It was hypothesised that higher knowledge and more positive attitudes would significantly predict improved hygiene practices. Results showed that while 74.6% reported handwashing after toilet use, only 39.3% consistently used soap. Knowledge of disease transmission through unsafe water was 35.4%, although overall attitudes were positive. Learners from higher-quintile schools had significantly better KAP scores than those from lower quintiles (

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHygieneSanitationSchoolsWater SupplyAdolescentCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHand DisinfectionHumansMaleSouth AfricaStudentsSurveys and Questionnaireshigh school learnershygiene behaviourknowledge, attitudes and practicesschool hygieneSouth AfricaWASH

Identifiers

PMID41595855
PMCPMC12840640

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.