Bibile 1961.

Methods	Randomized controlled trial Generation of allocation sequence: previously prepared list of random numbers Allocation concealment: no Blinding: not blinded Inclusion of all randomized participants: unclear Duration: not mentioned
Participants	Number of participants enrolled: unclear Number of participants analysed: 80 Loss to follow up: unclear Inclusion criteria: 3 or more unformed stools per day with blood and mucus; tenesmus; no previous treatment; macroscopic and microscopic appearance of the stool comparable with bacillary not amoebic dysentery Exclusion criteria: amoebic dysentery
Interventions	(1) Sulphadimidine (2 g immediately, followed by 1 g every 6 hours orally for 5 days) (2) Sulpha methoxy pyridazine (1 g on first day and 0.5 g daily orally for a further 4 days) (3)Tetracycline (250 mg orally every 6 hours for 5 days) (4) "Strepto triad" (3 tablets three times daily, orally for 5 days; each tablet of streptotriad contains streptomycin 65 mg, sulphamerazine 65 mg, sulphadiazine 100 mg, and sulphathiazole 100 mg). This group was not included in the analysis (sulphonamides versus tetracycline) as it contains a non‐sulphonamide drug ‐ streptomycin. Other interventions: Injection pethidine given to one participant for severe tenesmus
Outcomes	(1) Number clinically cured by day 5 (2) Number bacteriologically cured (3) Mean duration of fever in days (4) Mean duration of abnormal stool in days
Notes	Location: Sri Lanka Setting: not reported Follow‐up period: 8 days Antibiotic sensitivity pattern of Shigella isolates: not reported Funding source(s): Supplies of drugs from: Imperial Chemical Industries for sulphadimidine ("Sulphamethazine"); Lederle Laboratories for tetracycline ("Achromycon") and sulphamethoxazole ("Lederkyn"); May & Baker Ltd. for "Streptotriad".
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Adequate sequence generation?	Low risk	"...listed in a random order"
Allocation concealment?	High risk	"...previously prepared list of random numbers". Probably not done.
Blinding? All outcomes	High risk	Not mentioned; probably not done
Incomplete outcome data addressed? All outcomes	Low risk	No missing outcome data
Free of selective reporting?	Low risk	The study's prespecified outcomes, which were of interest in this review, have been reported
Free of other bias?	Low risk	The study appears to be free of other sources of bias