| Title |
Water system unreliability and diarrhea incidence among children in Guatemala
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Public Health, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00038-017-1054-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer Trudeau, Anna-Maria Aksan, William F. Vásquez |
| Abstract |
This article examines the effect of water system unreliability on diarrhea incidence among children aged 0-5 in Guatemala. We use secondary data from a nationally representative sample of 7579 children to estimate the effects of uninterrupted and interrupted water services on diarrhea incidence. The national scope of this study imposes some methodological challenges due to unobserved geographical heterogeneity. To address this issue, we estimate mixed-effects logit models that control for unobserved heterogeneity by estimating random effects of selected covariates that can vary across geographical areas (i.e. water system reliability). Compared to children without access to piped water, children with uninterrupted water services have a lower probability of diarrhea incidence by approximately 33 percentage points. Conversely, there is no differential effect between children without access and those with at least one day of service interruptions in the previous month. Results also confirm negative effects of age, female gender, spanish language, and garbage disposal on diarrhea incidence. Public health benefits of piped water are realized through uninterrupted provision of service, not merely access. Policy implications are discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 43 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 19% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 8 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 December 2017.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#1,359
of 1,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,860
of 318,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.