Marti 1996.

Methods	RCT. Lenght of follow‐up: 3 weeks.
Participants	Number randomized: 417 participants. Inclusion criteria: schoolchildren aged 9 to 22 years old. Inclusion criteria: any individual with demonstrated first or third‐stage larvae of S. stercoralis on stool sample was included in the trial. Exclusion criteria: consent not given; fever or other signs of acute illness; severe neurologic disorders; severe liver disorders; and pregnancy. Baseline signs and symptoms such as cough, abdominal distention, diffuse itching, urticaria, and larva migrans were recorded.
Interventions	Ivermectin 200 /kg single dose (N = 208) versus albendazole 400 mg/day for 3 days (N = 209).
Outcomes	Drug efficacy: negative stool samples (3 and 21 days). Symptoms of strongyloidiasis and adverse effects of the two drugs according to the literature were detailed beforehand. The list was translated from English into Kiswahili and back to English to ensure correct interpretation of the findings. The interviews were carried out in Kiswahili by a medical assistant of the Ministry of Health. Special symptoms were recorded on a separate sheet, where the findings of a thorough clinical examination were also recorded.
Notes	Kato‐Katz smear and Baermann. Place: Zanzibar.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	A randomized list for the sequential allocation of the drugs was prepared in advance.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	We do not know how allocation was concealed. Probably not done.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Cure overall	Low risk	No blinding of participants and personnel but we don't believe this will introduce bias.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Adverse events overall	High risk	No blinding, and the outcome is likely to be influenced by lack of blinding.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Cure overall	Low risk	No blinding, but we judge that the outcome measurement is unlikely to be influenced by lack of blinding.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Adverse events overall	High risk	No blinding, and the outcome measurement is likely to be influenced by lack of blinding.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	116/ 417 (28%) lost during follow‐up period (56/208 (27%):45 incomplete questionnaire or treatment and 11 incomplete follow‐up in the ivermectin arm and 60/209 (29%): 39 incomplete questionnaire or treatment and 21 incomplete follow‐up in the albendazole arm). Per‐protocol analysis.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	No protocol provided, but given the outcomes nominated in the methods section, all pre‐specified outcomes were reported.
Other bias	Low risk	No additional biases were identified.