Oral histories on water, sanitation, and hygiene across women’s lifecourse and wellbeing implications in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite notable global progress in tackling water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), substantial challenges persist, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While WASH in LMICs is a quintessentially gendered issue, with the burden falling primarily on women, their meaningful participation in WASH management is often questioned. And yet women have important stories to tell. This paper examines the experiences of WASH through the oral histories of older women (n = 32 respondents aged 60+) in three districts in northern Ghana. We situate this work within an eco-social framework that allows us to contextualize resource access related to the determinants of health. Findings reveal substantial perceived improvements in WASH access over the years. This progress was primarily attributed to education and training on appropriate WASH practices. Results also underscore the crucial role of stakeholders, including NGOs, local governments, WASH committees, women's support groups, and individual initiatives, in the advancement of local WASH services. However, the absence of adequate WASH services continues to exacerbate vulnerability to gender-based violence (GBV). Results indicate the need for collaboration and cooperation in achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 (water and sanitation for all), and most importantly, galvanize our thinking around the role of women in this process, by addressing SDG 5 (empowering women and girls) and SDG 3 (health and wellbeing for all).
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".