Koudou 2011.

Methods	Experimental hut trial
Participants	An gambiae s.s.
Interventions	Control: LLIN, PermaNet 2.0 Intervention: LLIN, PermaNet 3.0
Outcomes	Mosquito mortality, deterrence, exophily
Mosquito resistance status	Resistant ‐ high (deltamethrin, 10.6% mortality, N = 80 min)
Net treatment	Nets not holed, nets unwashed and washed (x 20)
Location(s)	Yaokoffikro, Côte d'Ivoire
Notes	Trial conducted: April 2009‐July 2009
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Were the mosquitoes in LLIN and LLIN + PBO groups comparable	Low risk	Huts situated in the same area – mosquito characteristics will be the same
Collectors blinded	Unclear risk	Unclear if collectors blinded – not stated in publication
Sleepers blinded	Unclear risk	Unclear if sleeper blinded – not stated in publication
Sleeper bias	Low risk	Sleepers were rotated between huts using a Latin square design
Treatment allocation (was the treatment allocation sequence randomly/adequately generated	Low risk	Treatments were not randomly allocated to the huts. However, results from trials performed before this trial showed no significant difference in attractiveness of the different huts
Treatment rotation	Low risk	Treatments were rotated between huts using a Latin square design
Standardized hut design	Low risk	Huts were built in a standard West‐African design
Hut cleaning between treatments	Low risk	All huts were cleaned between treatments
Were incomplete outcome data adequately addressed	Low risk	There were no incomplete data
Were the raw data reported for LLIN and LLIN + PBO groups	Low risk	All necessary data were reported
Trial authors' conflicting interest	Low risk	The trial authors declared there were no conflicting interests.