↓ Skip to main content

Shared latrines in Maputo, Mozambique: exploring emotional well-being and psychosocial stress

Overview of attention for article published in BMC International Health and Human Rights, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
1 tweeter


7 Dimensions

Readers on

54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Shared latrines in Maputo, Mozambique: exploring emotional well-being and psychosocial stress
Published in
BMC International Health and Human Rights, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12914-018-0169-z
Pubmed ID

Tess Shiras, Oliver Cumming, Joe Brown, Bacelar Muneme, Rassul Nala, Robert Dreibelbis


Approximately 18% of Sub-Saharan Africa's urban population relies on shared sanitation facilities, which are shared by one or more households. While there is growing recognition of sanitation's relationship with stress and well-being - particularly among women - most research has focused on rural populations and the transition from open defecation and/or unimproved latrines to private shared sanitation. This study explores sanitation-related stressors among users of both improved and unimproved shared sanitation facilities. This study was nested within the larger MapSan health impact trial (Trial Registration: NCT02362932). Participants were recruited from the control arm of the trial (Traditional Latrine (TL) users) and intervention arm, which received one of two improved shared sanitation facilities - Shared Latrines (SL) shared by up to 20 individuals and Community Sanitation Blocks (CSBs) shared by more than 20 individuals. Sampling was informed by a life stage perspective to reflect diversity in sanitation needs and experiences within the population. Data included 96 in-depth interviews, 7 focus group discussions, and 25 unstructured observations. Data collection and analysis followed a Grounded Theory approach, which was used to identify the key domains of sanitation-related stress among participants. A semi-structured tool was applied to all female interview transcripts to assess the frequency and severity of key stressors. Participants reported stress due to: lack of safety; lack of privacy; disgust about the latrine condition; and collective action failure in terms of managing the latrine, often causing neighborhood conflict or unhygienic sanitation conditions. Fewer SL and CSB users reported specific stress domains and - with the exception of perceived safety - reported fewer severe stressors. The leading cause of stress reduction due to the intervention was decreased disgust followed by increased privacy and safety. Our data suggest that "improved", shared facilities can reduce stress when proper maintenance and management systems are in place. Private, shared sanitation only had limited impact on users' perceptions of safety, particularly at night, suggesting that safety concerns extend beyond the physical latrine structure. Our research demonstrates that factors including latrine location and neighborhood violence are important determinants of safety perceptions and corresponding psychosocial stress.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Master 7 13%
Other 3 6%
Unspecified 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 7 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Environmental Science 5 9%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 16 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 03 October 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,594,271 outputs
Outputs from BMC International Health and Human Rights
of 356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 267,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC International Health and Human Rights
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,594,271 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 356 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 267,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them