Table 3.
Effect of the Mesita Azul intervention on drinking water contamination and diarrhea
| Analysis | N | Outcome frequency-control periods (%) | Risk difference (95% CI) | Risk ratio (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water contamination | ||||
| ITTstep* | 2,436 | 698 (59%) | −19% (−26%, −12%) | 0.67 (0.58, 0.77) |
| ITTcovariates† | 2,297 | 690 (59%) | −15% (−21%, −10%) | 0.72 (0.64, 0.80) |
| ITTsub-pop*‡ | 2,309 | 694 (59%) | −18% (−25%, −11%) | 0.70 (0.63, 0.78) |
| Diarrhea | ||||
| ITTstep* | 10,854 | 157 (3.1%) | −0.1% (−1.1%, 0.9%) | 0.80 (0.51, 1.27) |
| ITTcovariates§ | 10,779 | 157 (3.1%) | −0.1% (−1.1%, 0.8%) | 0.89 (0.57, 1.38) |
| ITTsub-pop*‡ | 10,244 | 153 (3.1%) | −0.3% (−1.3%, 0.7%) | 0.79 (0.49, 1.29) |
| Diarrhea: < 5 years | ||||
| ITTstep* | 765 | 9 (2.7%) | 0.0% (−1.5%, 1.6%) | DNC |
*
Model adjusted for step (season).
†
Model adjusted for step and baseline covariates: presence of feces in yard, ownership of a functional refrigerator.
‡
Restricted to households enrolled at baseline.
§
Model adjusted for step and baseline covariates: household reported personal hygiene prevents diarrhea at baseline, head of household started primary school.
ITT = intention-to-treat; CI = confidence interval; DNC = did not converge.