Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 14;2020(4):CD010599. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010599.pub2

Watkins 1996a.

Methods Design: parallel group randomized trial
Duration of study: February to October 1993
Follow‐up: 14 days
Participants Country: Republic of Guatemala
Setting: school
Number included in study: 246
Age: ≤ 12 years(mean 9.8 years)
Sex: not reported
Inclusion criteria: girls and boys aged ≤ 12 years who had not taken any deworming medicine in the past year
Exclusion criteria: pregnancy
Lost at follow‐up: 22 (8.8%)
Number positive for A lumbricoides: 209
Number included in review: 209
Interventions Treatment strategy: screening and treat all included participants
  • Group 1: albendazole 200 mg 2 tablets single dose (n = 106)

  • Group 2: placebo (n = 103)

Outcomes Outcomes included:Ascaris cure rates and pre‐ and post‐treatment AM and GM epg
Outcomes not included in review: anthropometric measures, anthelmintic efficacy for Trichuris
Notes Diagnostic technique: modified Kato‐Katz
Funding support: Pew Charitable Trusts, the US Agency for International Development University Development and Linkage Program, the Children's Miracle Network Telethon, and the ARCS Foundation
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote: "Children were stratified by sex and age and then randomly assigned."
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Details not reported.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Quote: "The children and field workers were unaware of treatment group assignment."
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Quote: "Although the 2‐week posttreatment egg examination made it clear to the study director, which treatment was which, this information was not communicated to the field workers."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 22 (8.8%) 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 other bias.