Predictors of Faecal Contamination Among Groundwater Sources In Gulu, Uganda
|Title:||Predictors of Faecal Contamination Among Groundwater Sources In Gulu, Uganda||Authors:||Cohen, Byron||Permanent link:||http://hdl.handle.net/10197/10110||Date:||Jul-2017||Online since:||2019-04-24T09:22:46Z||Abstract:||Faecal contamination of groundwater sources is a major problem throughout the developing world, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. WASH practitioners and policymakers need adequate predictors of faecal contamination of groundwater sources. Objective: To identify the predictors of faecal contamination of groundwater sources in Gulu, Uganda. Methodology: This study made use of data collected from 154 groundwater sources in Gulu, Uganda. Contamination was measured using thermotolerant coliform counts (cfu/100mL). Mann-Whitney U statistical tests of the relationships between categorical institutional variables and faecal contamination among water sources were carried out, and Spearman’s rho correlation was used to assess the relationships between numerical institutional variables and faecal contamination. Spearman’s rho correlation was used to assess the relationships between ROC score totals and faecal contamination. These relationships were further examined by creating logistic regression models to evaluate whether ROC score totals can accurate predict the crossing of various thresholds of faecal contamination among water sources. One-Way ANOVA and comparison of mean contamination levels was conducted across different water source types. Results: There was no statistically significant association between the presence of a water user committee and contamination. Water sources with water user fees had lower contamination levels by a statistically significant margin. There was no statistically significant association between water user fee amount or number of users and contamination. There were moderate positive correlations between ROC score totals and contamination among all water source types considered together (r=0.434, p=<0.001), and among all springs (r=0.361, p=0.03) but no statistically significant correlation could be observed within groups consisting exclusively of boreholes, protected springs, or unprotected springs. Boreholes were the safest water source type by a large margin, shallow boreholes, protected springs, and dug wells occupied a second safety tier, & unprotected springs occupied a distant third safety tier. Conclusion: Water source fee collection is a key predictor of contamination, while ROC score totals may not be valid predictors of contamination in all circumstances. Previous rankings of water source types by safety were largely confirmed, with some difference.||Type of material:||Master Thesis||Publisher:||University College Dublin||Keywords:||Water contamination; Gulu, Uganda; Drinking water; Faecal matter; Public health; Water source types||Language:||en||Status of Item:||Not peer reviewed|
|Appears in Collections:||Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science Theses|
Show full item record
This item is available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland. No item may be reproduced for commercial purposes. For other possible restrictions on use please refer to the publisher's URL where this is made available, or to notes contained in the item itself. Other terms may apply.