Cited by 48Child Nutrition and Water AccessGender Studies and Social IssuesEnergy and Environment Impacts

User Perceptions of Shared Sanitation among Rural Households in Indonesia and Bangladesh

Open access
Nelson, Kali B., Karver, Jonathan, Kullman, Craig, Graham, Jay P.·2014·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The practice of sharing sanitation facilities does not meet the current World Health Organization/UNICEF definition for what is considered improved sanitation. Recommendations have been made to categorize shared sanitation as improved sanitation if security, user access, and other conditions can be assured, yet limited data exist on user preferences with respect to shared facilities. OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed user perceptions of shared sanitation facilities in rural households in East Java, Indonesia, and Bangladesh. METHODS: Cross-sectional studies of 2,087 households in East Java and 3,000 households in Bangladesh were conducted using questionnaires and observational methods. Relative risks were calculated to analyze associations between sanitation access and user perceptions of satisfaction, cleanliness, and safety. RESULTS: In East Java, 82.4% of households with private improved sanitation facilities reported feeling satisfied with their place of defecation compared to 68.3% of households with shared improved facilities [RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09, 1.31]. In Bangladesh, 87.7% of households with private improved facilities reported feeling satisfied compared to 74.5% of households with shared improved facilities [RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.10, 1.20]. In East Java, 79.5% of households who reported a clean latrine also reported feeling satisfied with their place of defecation; only 38.9% of households who reported a dirty latrine also reported feeling satisfied [RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.45, 2.08]. CONCLUSION: Simple distinctions between improved and unimproved sanitation facilities tend to misrepresent the variability observed among households sharing sanitation facilities. Our results suggest that private improved sanitation is consistently preferred over any other sanitation option. An increased number of users appeared to negatively affect toilet cleanliness, and lower levels of cleanliness were associated with lower levels of satisfaction. However, when sanitation facilities were clean and shared by a limited number of households, users of shared facilities often reported feeling both satisfied and safe.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0103886

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nelson, K. B., Karver, J., Kullman, C., & Graham, J. P.
Affiliations
George Washington University (US)
Corresponding author
Graham, Jay P.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2014-08-04
Volume
9
Issue
8
Pages
e103886
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094237502
Cited by
48
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Studies and Social Issues
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Energy and Environment Impacts
Keywords
shared sanitation, user perception, rural households, improved sanitation, user satisfaction, East Java, Bangladesh
MeSH terms
Adult, Bangladesh, Family Characteristics, Female, Humans, Hygiene, Indonesia, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Rural Population, Sanitation, Toilet Facilities

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