Jones 1958 KEN.

Methods	Dates of study: 1952‐1953 Location of study: Kenya Malaria endemicity (prevalence): Intervention group 1 (September 1952): 60% in school‐age children; Comparison group 1 (September 1953): 34% in school‐age children [Moderate] Transmission season: January to March, May to August Malaria species: P. falciparum, P. malariae, P. vivax Vector species: A. gambiae, A. funestus Study design: Non‐randomized controlled study Evaluation design: Cross‐sectional surveys
Participants	Age groups included: All ages; school‐age children Sample size Intervention group 1 (range): 3721‐4500 Comparison group 1: Not specified
Interventions	Intervention group 1: MDA administered to all school children in Makueni with pyrimethamine 100 mg for three rounds in September 1952, March 1953 and September 1953. Coverage not specified. No co‐interventions. Comparison group 1: School children in Okia used as a comparison arm. No co‐interventions.
Outcomes	Parasitaemia prevalence Gametocytaemia prevalence No adverse event surveillance conducted No adverse events reported
Notes	Outcome data for the intervention group is a subset of the Jones 1954 KEN study. The meta‐analysis only included first‐round results. Gametocytaemia prevalence data is forP. falciparum only.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	High risk	Non‐randomized controlled study
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Non‐randomized controlled study
Baseline imbalance (selection bias)	High risk	Baseline parasitaemia estimates are not balanced between the intervention group and the comparison group.
Contamination protection	Unclear risk	Although the comparison group site was 13 miles from the intervention group site, there is no indication whether the control group was adequately protected against contamination. It is quite possible that the control group received the intervention.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Participants and personnel aware of treatment, but unclear if this impacted outcomes
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not blinded, but unclear if this impacted outcomes
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Individual data kept of all school‐age children and of all subjects with malaria attending the dispensary. No antimalarials were sold in local shops. At the end of the 12th month of evaluation, 221 children remained out of the original 297 children.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Blood smears from random samples and all school‐age children. Over the course of the study, the school population rose by 178 children. To avoid confusion, the investigators excluded these additional children from the figures used to compile prevalence and only reported data from the original 297 children.
Other bias	High risk	Complicated by drug resistance