Evidence Hub

Prevalence and epidemiological distribution of indicators of pathogenic bacteria in households drinking water in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ermias Alemayehu Adugna, Abel Weldetinsae, Z. A. Alemu, A. K. Daba, D. A. Dinssa, Tiruneh Tariku, M. G. Weldegebriel, M. G. Serte et al.

BMC Public Health, 2024

7 citations

Abstract

Ensuring the availability of safe drinking water remains a critical challenge in developing countries, including Ethiopia. Therefore, this paper aimed to investigate the prevalence of fecal coliform and E. coli bacteria and, geographical, children availability, and seasonal exposure assessment through a meta-analysis. Two independent review groups extensively searched internet databases for English-language research articles published between 2013 and 2023. This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines. The methodological quality of each included study was evaluated using the STROBE guidelines. Publication bias was assessed by visual inspection of a funnel plot and then tested by the Egger regression test, and meta-analysis was performed using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models with inverse variance weighting. Subgroup analyses were also conducted to explore heterogeneity. Out of 48 potentially relevant studies, only 21 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were considered for meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of fecal coliform and E. coli was 64% (95% CI: 56.0–71.0%, I2 = 95.8%) and 54% (95% CI: 45.7–62.3%, I2 = 94.2%), respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed that the prevalence of fecal coliform bacteria increased during the wet season (70%) compared to the dry season (60%), particularly in households with under-five children (74%) compared to all households (61%), in rural (68%) versus urban (66%) areas, and in regions with high…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free