While water and sanitation are now recognized as a human right by the United Nations, monitoring inequality in safe water access poses challenges. This study uses survey data to calculate household socio-economic-status (SES) indices in seven countries where national drinking-water quality surveys are available. These are used to assess inequalities in access as indicated by type of improved water source, use of safe water, and a combination of these. In Bangladesh, arsenic exposure through drinking-water is not significantly related to SES (p = 0.06) among households using tubewells, whereas in Peru, chlorine residual in piped systems varies significantly with SES (p < 0.0001). In Ethiopia, Nicaragua, and Nigeria, many poor households access nonpiped improved sources, which may provide unsafe water, resulting in greater inequality of access to "safe" water compared to "improved" water sources. Concentration indices increased from 0.08 to 0.15, 0.10 to 0.14, and 0.24 to 0.26, respectively, in these countries. There was minimal difference in Jordan and Tajikistan. Although the results are likely to be underestimates as they exclude individual-level inequalities, they show that use of a binary "improved"/"unimproved" categorization masks substantial inequalities. Future international monitoring programmes should take account of inequality in access and safety.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 84. 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 16 December 2023.
All research outputs
#614,661
of 32,285,140 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#923
of 24,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,905
of 334,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#6
of 203 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,285,140 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
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 334,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 203 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
