Water and Sanitation Hygiene Knowledge Attitude Practice in Urban Slum Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Access to improved drinking water, sanitation and hygiene is one of the prime concerns around the globe. This study aimed at assessing water and sanitation hygiene-related attitude and practices, and quality of water in urban slums of south Delhi, India. METHODOLOGY: This pilot cross sectional study was performed during July 2013 across four urban slums of South Delhi. A convenient sample of 40 participants was enrolled. A modified version of previously validated questionnaire was used to gather information on socio-demographics, existing water and sanitation facilities and water treatment practices. Water quality testing was additionally performed using hydrogen sulphide (H2S) vials. RESULTS: Average age of participants was 36 years (SD=10). 83% of the participants perceived gastrointestinal tract infection as the most important health problem. 75% of the participants did not use any method for drinking water treatment. 45% of the participants consumed water from privately-owned tube well/ bore well. Water shortage lasted two days or more (50%) at a stretch with severe scarcity occurring twice a year (40%). Females aged 15 years and above were largely responsible (93%) for fetching water from water source. 45% of the participants had toilets within their households. 53% of drinking water samples collected from storage containers showed positive bacteriological contamination. DISCUSSION: There is an urgent need to develop family centered educational programs that would enhance awareness about water treatment methods that are cost effective and easily accessible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".