Cross-sectional study reveals households track broad water contamination trends but misjudge individual risk in rural Ghana, highlighting the need for objective testing over subjective perception.
In low-resource settings, drinking-water safety decisions are frequently shaped by subjective perceptions rather than objective contamination data, yet this correspondence is poorly characterized. This cross-sectional study (n = 425) in Nadowli-Kaleo District, Upper West Region, Ghana examined concordance between perceived drinking-water quality and field-observed sanitary contamination risk, together with socioeconomic determinants of risk appraisal calibration. Perceived quality was rated on a 1–5 Likert scale; field-observed sanitary contamination risk was aggregated into a 0–4 ordinal risk index from a structured observation checklist (a proxy for, not a direct microbiological measure of, water quality), reverse-scaled, with perceptions classified as calibrated when |gap| ≤ 0.5. Perceived quality was strongly and inversely associated with observed contamination risk (Spearman’s ρ = −0.780; p < 0.001), indicating that household perceptions tracked broad contamination-risk gradients well. However, agreement at the individual household level was weaker: only 49.4% of households met the calibration criterion (mean gap = −0.86) under our primary threshold, and this proportion was sensitive to the threshold chosen (ranging from 26.1% at ±0.3 to 63.1% at ±1.0). Educational attainment showed no reliable association with calibration accuracy (no formal education 55.5%; secondary 44.1%; postgraduate 12.5%, n = 8; Pearson χ²(4) = 7.24, p = 0.124), and a quadratic logistic model provided no evidence of a non-linear (inverted-U) relationship (quadratic OR = 0.94; p = 0.462); income and residence duration were likewise not significant predictors. These findings suggest that perception-based metrics alone may be insufficient for individual-level risk assessment, and that common socioeconomic proxies do not reliably identify well-calibrated households, calling for objective monitoring and tailored risk communication to advance SDG 6.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alhassan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: