ArticleBMJ open2026
Barriers and facilitators to the utilisation of point-of-use water treatment systems during and immediately following flood-related disasters: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goal 6 seeks to ensure universal access to safe drinking water by 2030, but vast inequities in access exist, especially among vulnerable communities including limited resource, rural, disaster-affected areas. Flood disasters, exacerbated by the climate crisis, hinder the ability of individuals and families to meet essential drinking water needs and increase their susceptibility to waterborne illnesses. Point-of-use (POU) water treatment is an effective solution for water-insecure populations during and immediately following flood emergencies. However, an initial literature search identified knowledge gaps surrounding implementation of POU water systems. This scoping review aims to synthesise published evidence between January 2015 and July 2025 on barriers and facilitators to utilisation of POU water treatment systems during and immediately following flood-related disasters. The findings will inform efforts to promote resilience and agency among water insecure communities, specifically by equipping them with actionable knowledge on sustainable access to safe drinking water. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be guided by the work of Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Search terms will be identified through an iterative process using the PICOT method and Boolean logic. Four databases-Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar-with the addition of grey literature from UN agencies and non-governmental organisations focused on water-related issues will be searched. Two independent reviewers will apply a priori eligibility criteria to select studies. Conflicts will be resolved through discussion and a third independent reviewer absent agreement between the first two reviewers. Cohen's kappa statistic will be calculated to assess inter-rater reliability. Data extraction will be guided by predefined data points, and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research will guide evidence synthesis through a solution-based approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Institutional research ethics review is not required because no human subjects are involved. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, a policy brief, conference presentations and infographics for use by organisations serving flood disaster impacted communities.
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.