↓ Skip to main content

Piloting a low-cost hardware intervention to reduce improper disposal of solid waste in communal toilets in low-income settlements in Dhaka, Bangladesh

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Piloting a low-cost hardware intervention to reduce improper disposal of solid waste in communal toilets in low-income settlements in Dhaka, Bangladesh
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4693-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Farzana Yeasmin, Stephen P. Luby, Ronald E. Saxton, Fosiul A. Nizame, Mahbub-Ul Alam, Notan Chandra Dutta, Abdullah-Al Masud, Dalia Yeasmin, Anita Layden, Habibur Rahman, Rachel Abbott, Leanne Unicomb, Peter J. Winch

Abstract

Bangladesh faces daunting challenges in addressing the sanitation needs of its urban poor. Maintaining the cleanliness and functionality of communal toilets is dependent upon periodic emptying of fecal sludge, and cooperation between users of communal toilets. Trash disposal into latrines can block the outflow pipes, rendering the toilets non-functional. Pre-intervention: We conducted in-depth interviews with five operators of fecal sludge emptying equipment and five adult residents who were also caregivers of children. We identified factors contributing to improper disposal of trash into communal toilets, a barrier to operation of the equipment, in low-income communities of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Intervention design: We developed behavior change communication materials to discourage waste disposal in toilets, and promote use of waste bins. We conducted six focus group discussions with adult male, female, landlord and children to select the preferred design for waste bins to be placed inside toilets, and finalize communication materials. Post-intervention: We then pilot-tested an intervention package to promote appropriate trash disposal practices and thus facilitate periodic removal of fecal sludge when the latrine pits become full. We conducted 20 in-depth interviews and four focus group discussions with community residents, landlords and cleaners of communal toilets. Barriers to appropriate waste disposal included lack of private location for disposal of menstrual hygiene products, limited options for formal trash collection and disposal, and the use of plastic bags for disposing children's feces. A pilot intervention including behavior change communication and trash bins was implemented in two urban slum communities. Spot checks confirmed that the bins were in place and used. Respondents described positive improvements in the appearance of the toilet and surrounding environment. The current practice on the part of local residents of disposing of waste into toilets impedes the safe removal of fecal sludge and impairs toilet functionality. Residents reported positive changes in toilet cleanliness and usability resulting from this intervention, and this both improves the user experience with toilets, and also promotes the sustainability of the entrepreneurial model of Vacutug operators supported by WSUP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 171 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 17%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 9%
Lecturer 11 6%
Student > Bachelor 11 6%
Other 30 18%
Unknown 51 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 21 12%
Environmental Science 19 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 10%
Engineering 14 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 63 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2017.
All research outputs
#7,532,821
of 23,002,898 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,952
of 14,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,877
of 315,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#96
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,002,898 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.