Table 5.

Overview of 17 studies comparing different intervention strategies [information communication (A), incentives (B), or infrastructural modifications (C)].

Three main groups of outcome measures (as relevant to the studies) have been shown in the graph- KAP- Waste segregation knowledge/attitude/intention, Waste Audit- Waste weight/volume and/or Waste composition analysis/pick analysis, Participation- Participation in waste segregation/recycling/composting scheme/intervention (participant self-reported/author measured).

Comparison of effect among intervention strategies is represented by “>”- greater effect and “ = ” implying no difference in effect.

Study quality is shown through colour of the cell: green = low risk of bias; amber = some concerns; red = high risk of bias and to classify into these groups, the risk of bias scores of individual studies were divided into tertiles.

^aStudy designs: N-nonrandomised; R-randomised; MA-Multi-arm/multiple interventions; C-controlled; NoC-non-controlled; CBA-controlled before-after; BA-non-controlled before-after; A-information communication, B-provision of incentives, C-infrastructural modifications; “+”- when strategies are combined-for example AB + implies combination of information and incentives.