Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea

  1. Thomas F Clasen1,*,
  2. Ian G Roberts2,
  3. Taber Rabie3,
  4. Wolf-Peter Schmidt1,
  5. Sandy Cairncross3

Editorial Group: Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group

Published Online: 21 JAN 2009

Assessed as up-to-date: 21 JAN 2006

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004794.pub2

Database Title

Additional Information

How to Cite

Clasen TF, Roberts IG, Rabie T, Schmidt WP, Cairncross S. Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD004794. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004794.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London, UK

  2. 2

    London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Cochrane Injuries Group, London, UK

  3. 3

    London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, Disease Control and Vector Biology Unit, London, UK

*Thomas F Clasen, Department of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK. thomas.clasen@lshtm.ac.uk.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 21 JAN 2009

SEARCH

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Summary (59K)Standard (616K)Full (1154K)
[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Funnel plot to explore publication bias
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (rate ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: children < 5 years.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Water quality intervention versus control: point of intervention (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 2.2]
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Water quality intervention versus control: point of intervention (risk ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: children < 5 years.
[Analysis 3.1]
Analysis 3.1. Comparison 3 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 3.2]
Analysis 3.2. Comparison 3 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: children < 5 years.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (odds ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (odds ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: children < 5 years.
[Analysis 5.1]
Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (means ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 5.2]
Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 Water quality intervention versus control: point and type of intervention (means ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: children < 5 years.
[Analysis 6.1]
Analysis 6.1. Comparison 6 Water quantity intervention versus control: by compliance with intervention (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 7.1]
Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 Water quality intervention versus control: by compliance with intervention (odds ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 8.1]
Analysis 8.1. Comparison 8 Water quality intervention versus control: by ambient water quality (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 9.1]
Analysis 9.1. Comparison 9 Water quality intervention versus control: by ambient water quality (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 10.1]
Analysis 10.1. Comparison 10 Water quality intervention versus control: by ambient water quality (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 11.1]
Analysis 11.1. Comparison 11 Water quality intervention versus control: by ambient water quality (odds ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 12.1]
Analysis 12.1. Comparison 12 Water quality intervention versus control: by sufficiency of water quantity (long. prev. ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 13.1]
Analysis 13.1. Comparison 13 Water quality intervention versus control: by water supply level (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 14.1]
Analysis 14.1. Comparison 14 Water quality intervention versus control: by water supply level (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 15.1]
Analysis 15.1. Comparison 15 Water quality intervention versus control: by water supply level (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 16.1]
Analysis 16.1. Comparison 16 Water quality intervention versus control: by water supply level (odds ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 17.1]
Analysis 17.1. Comparison 17 Water quality intervention versus control: by sanitation level (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 18.1]
Analysis 18.1. Comparison 18 Water quality intervention versus control: by sanitation level (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 19.1]
Analysis 19.1. Comparison 19 Water quality intervention versus control: by sanitation level (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 20.1]
Analysis 20.1. Comparison 20 Water quality intervention versus control: simple and compound interventions (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 21.1]
Analysis 21.1. Comparison 21 Water quality intervention versus control: simple and compound interventions (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 22.1]
Analysis 22.1. Comparison 22 Water quality intervention versus control: simple and compound interventions (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 23.1]
Analysis 23.1. Comparison 23 Water quality intervention versus control: simple and compound interventions (odds ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: all ages.
[Analysis 24.1]
Analysis 24.1. Comparison 24 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: by allocation sequence.
[Analysis 24.2]
Analysis 24.2. Comparison 24 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (rate ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: by allocation concealment.
[Analysis 24.3]
Analysis 24.3. Comparison 24 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (rate ratios), Outcome 3 Diarrhoea: by follow up.
[Analysis 24.4]
Analysis 24.4. Comparison 24 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (rate ratios), Outcome 4 Diarrhoea: by blinding.
[Analysis 25.1]
Analysis 25.1. Comparison 25 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: by allocation sequence.
[Analysis 25.2]
Analysis 25.2. Comparison 25 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (risk ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: by allocation concealment.
[Analysis 25.3]
Analysis 25.3. Comparison 25 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (risk ratios), Outcome 3 Diarrhoea: by follow up.
[Analysis 25.4]
Analysis 25.4. Comparison 25 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (risk ratios), Outcome 4 Diarrhoea: by blinding.
[Analysis 26.1]
Analysis 26.1. Comparison 26 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: allocation sequence.
[Analysis 26.2]
Analysis 26.2. Comparison 26 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: by allocation concealment.
[Analysis 26.3]
Analysis 26.3. Comparison 26 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 3 Diarrhoea: by follow up.
[Analysis 26.4]
Analysis 26.4. Comparison 26 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (longitudinal prevalence ratios), Outcome 4 Diarrhoea: by blinding.
[Analysis 27.1]
Analysis 27.1. Comparison 27 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (odds ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: by allocation sequence.
[Analysis 27.2]
Analysis 27.2. Comparison 27 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (odds ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: by allocation concealment.
[Analysis 27.3]
Analysis 27.3. Comparison 27 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (odds ratios), Outcome 3 Diarrhoea: by follow up.
[Analysis 27.4]
Analysis 27.4. Comparison 27 Water quality intervention versus control for RCTs: by methodological quality (odds ratios), Outcome 4 Diarrhoea: by blinding.
[Analysis 28.1]
Analysis 28.1. Comparison 28 Water quality intervention versus control for quasi-RCTs: by methodological quality (rate ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: by comparability of characteristics.
[Analysis 28.2]
Analysis 28.2. Comparison 28 Water quality intervention versus control for quasi-RCTs: by methodological quality (rate ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: by contemporaneous of data collection.
[Analysis 29.1]
Analysis 29.1. Comparison 29 Water quality intervention versus control for quasi-RCTs: by methodological quality (risk ratios), Outcome 1 Diarrhoea: by comparability of characteristics.
[Analysis 29.2]
Analysis 29.2. Comparison 29 Water quality intervention versus control for quasi-RCTs: by methodological quality (risk ratios), Outcome 2 Diarrhoea: by contemporaneous of data collection.
View Full Article (HTML) Summary (59K)Standard (616K)Full (1154K)