Cited by 20Wastewater Treatment and ReuseGender Studies and Social IssuesChild Nutrition and Water Access

Multidimensional Benefits of Improved Sanitation: Evaluating ‘PEE POWER®’in Kisoro, Uganda.

Open access
You, Jiseon, Staddon, Chad, Cook, Alan, Walker, James, Boulton, Jess, Powell, Wayne, Ieropoulos, Ioannis·2020·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Abstract

With 2.3 billion people around the world lacking adequate sanitation services, attention has turned to alternative service provision models. This study suggests an approach for meeting the sanitation challenge, especially as expressed in Sustainable Development Goal 6.2, using a toilet technology system, such as Pee Power® that generates electricity using diverted urine as a fuel. A field trial was carried out in a girls' school in Kisoro, Uganda, where the generated electricity was used to light the existing toilet block. The trial was evaluated in terms of social acceptability and user experience using a multidimensional assessment protocol. The results of our assessment show that users felt safer when visiting the toilets at night. Lights provided from the technology also helped with the perceived cleanliness of the toilets. The technology was well accepted, with 97% of the respondents saying that they liked the idea of the Pee Power® technology and 94% preferring it over other facilities on site. This shows how the technology helps meet SDG target 6.2, with its particular focus on vulnerable populations.

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 · 10.3390/ijerph17072175

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • The Safety and Security domain is well-researched; 82 (32%) articles document links between WASH and safety and security, yet only one study evaluated a program that improved perceived safety.

    “For example, the Safety and Security domain is well-researched; 82 (32%) articles document links between WASH and safety and security, yet only one study evaluated a program that improved perceived safety [257].”

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
You, J., Staddon, C., Cook, A., Walker, J., Boulton, J., Powell, W., & Ieropoulos, I.
Affiliations
University of the West of England (GB)
Corresponding author
Staddon, Chad
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-03-25
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
2175
ISSN
1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3009551047
Cited by
20
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Lloyd's Register Foundation (G0068)
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1149065, OPP1189676)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Studies and Social Issues
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
Keywords
urine diversion, sanitation technology, school toilets, social acceptance, user experience, perceived safety, vulnerable populations
MeSH terms
Sustainable Development, Child, Female, Humans, Safety, Sanitation, Schools, Toilet Facilities, Uganda

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