MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362588731 · doi:10.1371/journal.pwat.0000050

Unequal access to improved water and sanitation in a post-conflict context of Liberia: Evidence from the Demographic and Health Survey

2023· article· en· W4362588731 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Amoak, Gabrielle Bruser, Roger Antabe, Yujiro Sano, Isaac Luignaah

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Water · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityMultiple Sclerosis Society of CanadaNOSM UniversityThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanitationContext (archaeology)HygienePublic healthSocioeconomic statusEnvironmental healthSocioeconomicsGeographyEconomic growthPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsPopulationMedicineSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public health and wellbeing in Liberia have been compromised by a lack of access to safe drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), compounded by 14 years of civil unrest. After almost two decades of relative peace and stability, disparities in WASH access persist and diseases linked to WASH such as Ebola, cholera, and COVID-19 have posed major public health challenges. Yet, there is nascent research in the context of post-war Liberia examining the determinants of access to WASH. To contribute to WASH policy in Liberia, this study examined the predictors of improved water and sanitation using the 2019–20 Liberia Demographic and Health Survey. Using the complementary log-log link function, we found that some socioeconomic and geographical factors were associated with access to improved water and sanitation. For example, poorer and rural households were less likely to have access to improved water and sanitation compared to their wealthier and urban counterparts, respectively. Based on these findings, we discussed policy implications and potential directions for future research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS WaterSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207