School water, sanitation, and hygiene inequalities: a bane of sustainable development goal six in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The importance of school water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) in achieving the Sustainable Development Goal targets 6.1 and 6.2 in developing countries cannot be overemphasized. However, widespread WASH inequalities remain an impediment to achieving the targets by 2030. Hence, this study was conducted to examine current school-WASH disparities among public and private schools in a low-income Nigerian community using mixed methods. Methods The cross-sectional survey utilized multi-stage sampling to select 400 students from five public and five private schools in Akinyele, Ibadan. Semi-structured questionnaires and observational checklists were used to obtain data. Inferential statistics were measured at a 95% confidence interval. Independent variables like the students’ sociodemographic characteristics, school type, and available WASH facilities were associated with dependent variables like respondents’ hand hygiene and sanitation practices and WASH-associated knowledge and attitude to examine existing inequalities. Results Classifying the available WASH facilities based on the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, none of the public schools provided any sanitation and hygiene service, while all the private schools provided both services. Furthermore, the private-school students had significantly better WASH knowledge (p<0.001; Ƞ2p=0.152) and attitude (p<0.001; Ƞ2p=0.036) compared with the public-school students. Also, a significantly higher portion of public-school students practiced open defecation at school (p<0.001; odds ratio (OR)=7.4; confidence interval (CI)=4.1–13.5) and at home (p<0.001; OR=7.8; CI=3.7–16.7). Conclusion WASH disparities among socioeconomic groups remain a persistent challenge. Sole reliance on the Government to narrow the inequalities has persistently proven unfruitful. There is a need to empower local community stakeholders to facilitate sustainable school-WASH interventions.Other Information Published in: Canadian Journal of Public Health License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 See article on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.17269/s41997-022-00633-9
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".