↓ Skip to main content

Process evaluation and assessment of use of a large scale water filter and cookstove program in Rwanda

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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.
Title
Process evaluation and assessment of use of a large scale water filter and cookstove program in Rwanda
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3237-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina K. Barstow, Corey L. Nagel, Thomas F. Clasen, Evan A. Thomas

Abstract

In an effort to reduce the disease burden in rural Rwanda, decrease poverty associated with expenditures for fuel, and minimize the environmental impact on forests and greenhouse gases from inefficient combustion of biomass, the Rwanda Ministry of Health (MOH) partnered with DelAgua Health (DelAgua), a private social enterprise, to distribute and promote the use of improved cookstoves and advanced water filters to the poorest quarter of households (Ubudehe 1 and 2) nationally, beginning in Western Province under a program branded Tubeho Neza ("Live Well"). The project is privately financed and earns revenue from carbon credits under the United Nations Clean Development Mechanism. During a 3-month period in late 2014, over 470,000 people living in over 101,000 households were provided free water filters and cookstoves. Following the distribution, community health workers visited nearly 98 % of households to perform household level education and training activities. Over 87 % of households were visited again within 6 months with a basic survey conducted. Detailed adoption surveys were conducted among a sample of households, 1000 in the first round, 187 in the second. Approximately a year after distribution, reported water filter use was above 90 % (+/-4 % CI) and water present in filter was observed in over 76 % (+/-6 % CI) of households, while the reported primary stove was nearly 90 % (+/-4.4 % CI) and of households cooking at the time of the visit, over 83 % (+/-5.3 % CI) were on the improved stove. There was no observed association between household size and stove stacking behavior. This program suggests that free distribution is not a determinant of low adoption. It is plausible that continued engagement in households, enabled by Ministry of Health support and carbon financed revenue, contributed to high adoption rates. Overall, the program was able to demonstrate a privately financed, public health intervention can achieve high levels of initial adoption and usage of household level water filtration and improved cookstoves at a large scale.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 tweeters 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Researcher 16 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 5 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 13 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 15%
Engineering 11 14%
Environmental Science 9 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 10%
Other 19 23%
Unknown 9 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 20 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,586,505
of 15,289,603 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,880
of 10,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,426
of 266,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,289,603 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,564 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 266,177 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.