Belizario 2003.
Methods |
Design: parallel group randomized trial Duration of study: second half of 1998 Duration of follow‐up: 7–14 days |
|
Participants |
Country: Republic of the Philippines Setting: school Number included in study: 784 Age: 6–12 years Sex: not reported Inclusion criteria: boys or girls; aged 6–12 years; informed consent; A lumbricoides or T trichiura (or both) eggs in stool samples; and compliance with protocol, requiring stool samples at the specified times after treatment Exclusion criteria: previous hypersensitivity reaction to benzimidazole, ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine, or any related compound; other helminths; without the target helminths listed; diarrhoea disease; receipt of any anthelmintic in the 2 weeks before enrolment; receipt of an anthelmintic during the study period; and concomitant infection or underlying disease compromising evaluation of the response to the medications being studied Lost at follow‐up: 29 (3.7%) Number positive for A lumbricoides: 528 Number included in review: 306 |
|
Interventions |
Treatment strategy: screening and treat all included participants
|
|
Outcomes |
Outcomes included:Ascaris prevalence pre‐ and post‐treatment, cure rate, pre‐ and post‐treatment AM epg, ERR Outcomes not included in review: efficacy of anthelmintic treatment for Trichuris; efficacy of diethylcarbamazine and albendazole + diethylcarbamazine for A lumbricoides. |
|
Notes |
Diagnostic technique: Kato‐Katz Funding support: World Health Organization |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Details not reported. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Details not reported. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Quote: "Placebo resembling albendazole was used together with the one‐drug treatments in order to make it appear that all pupils were receiving a combination of two drugs." Comment: ivermectin not blinded. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Details not reported. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 29 (3.7%) participants lost at follow‐up and not included in analysis. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Adverse events not reported. |
Other bias | Low risk | No obvious source of bias. |