Alareqi Mohammed Muneer, Alshoaibi Lina Hassan, Liu Yanli, Dhital Sushma, Zhang Benzhong
School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
School of Stomatology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Iran J Public Health. 2024 Feb;53(2):335-347. doi: 10.18502/ijph.v53i2.14918.
In humanitarian crises, water, sanitation and hygiene interventions are critical for the survival of people. However, strong evidence-based information is still limited. In order to describe the quantity and quality of current evidence, we conducted an evidence gap map provides a visual overview, highlighting areas lacking evidence.
According to developed inclusion and exclusion criteria, a systematic literature search was conducted to find related systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS and Cochrane were searched using search strings from 2000 until 2021. Characteristics of the included reviews were extracted and summarized. Two persons evaluated methodological quality independently using the AMSTAR tool. Invite a third person to solve any discrepancies.
This study revealed seven systematic reviews, including one meta-analysis. One study was of high quality, four of medium, and two of low quality. A total of 272 primary studies were included with a median value of 38.8 (range, 6-106) which deeply analyzed for data extraction. Cross-sectional, case-control, and qualitative case studies were the most used study designs. Diarrheal diseases were the most reported outcomes representing 46% of the impact evaluations. Cholera outbreaks account for 43% of a crisis context. The research gaps were insufficient reporting of some interventions with related outcomes and the geographical distribution of current evidence.
There is a limitation in current evidence represented by a lack of high-quality and experimental studies investigate the impact of water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) interventions on health and behavioral outcomes in humanitarian sittings.
在人道主义危机中,水、环境卫生和个人卫生干预措施对人们的生存至关重要。然而,基于有力证据的信息仍然有限。为了描述当前证据的数量和质量,我们绘制了一张证据缺口图,以提供直观的概述,突出缺乏证据的领域。
根据制定的纳入和排除标准,进行系统的文献检索,以查找相关的系统评价和荟萃分析。使用检索词在包括PubMed、科学网、Scopus和Cochrane在内的数据库中进行检索,检索时间范围为2000年至2021年。提取并总结纳入评价的特征。两名研究人员使用AMSTAR工具独立评估方法学质量。邀请第三名研究人员解决任何分歧。
本研究共纳入7篇系统评价,其中1篇为荟萃分析。1项研究质量高,4项中等,2项低等。共纳入272项原始研究,中位数为38.8(范围6 - 106),对其进行深入的数据提取分析。横断面研究、病例对照研究和定性案例研究是最常用的研究设计。腹泻病是报告最多的结果,占影响评估的46%。霍乱疫情占危机情况的43%。研究差距在于一些干预措施及其相关结果的报告不足以及当前证据的地理分布。
目前的证据存在局限性,表现为缺乏高质量的实验性研究来调查水、环境卫生和个人卫生(WaSH)干预措施在人道主义环境中对健康和行为结果的影响。