Cited by 123Urban and Rural Development ChallengesChild Nutrition and Water AccessGender Studies and Social Issues

Sanitation facilities in Kampala slums, Uganda: users' satisfaction and determinant factors

Tumwebaze, Innocent Kamara, Orach, Christopher Garimoi, Niwagaba, Charles, Luthi, Christoph, Mosler, Hans-Joachim·2013·International Journal of Environmental Health Research

Abstract

Access to improved sanitation is a key preventive measure against sanitary-related gastro-enteric diseases such as diarrhoea. We assessed the access to sanitation facilities and users' satisfaction in 50 randomly selected slums of Kampala through a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2010. A total of 1500 household respondents were interviewed. Sixty-eight per cent of the respondents used shared toilets, 20% private, 11% public toilets and less than 1% reported using flying toilets or practising open defecation. More than half of the respondents (51.7%) were not satisfied with their sanitation facilities. Determinants for satisfaction with the facilities used included the nature and type of toilet facilities used, their cleanliness, and the number of families sharing them. The study findings showed that slum dwellers had high access to sanitation facilities. However, most of them were shared and majority of the respondents were not satisfied with their facilities, primarily due to cleanliness and over demand.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09603123.2012.713095

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tumwebaze, I. K., Orach, C. G., Niwagaba, C., Luthi, C., & Mosler, H.-J.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Makerere University (UG)
  • Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (CH)
Corresponding author
Tumwebaze, Innocent Kamara
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Health Research
Published
2013-06
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
191-204
ISSN
  • 0960-3123 (ISSN-L)
  • 1369-1619
OpenAlex
W2044719162
Cited by
123
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 6
FWCI
37.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Health Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DORA Eawag (Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag)) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
  • Direktion für Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban and Rural Development Challenges
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Studies and Social Issues
Keywords
sanitation facilities, slums, shared toilets, user satisfaction, open defecation, toilet cleanliness, diarrhea prevention, Kampala
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude, Cross-Sectional Studies, Data Collection, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Poverty Areas, Sanitation, Toilet Facilities, Uganda, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review