Wimmersberger 2018.

Methods	Design: parallel group randomized trial Follow‐up: 21 days
Participants	Country: République de Côte d'Ivoire Setting: rural school from 7 village Age: 2–12 years Sex: 46% girls Number included in study: 302 Inclusion criteria: children with T trichiura infection intensities of > 60 epg of stool in preschool aged and 100 epg in school age Exclusion criteria: children with any systemic illness (e.g. symptomatic malaria, severe anaemia defined as haemoglobin < 70 g/L in preschool‐aged and < 80 g/L in school‐aged children, underwent any anthelminthic treatment within the past 4 weeks, or were allergic to ivermectin Follow‐up: 10 (3.3%) Number positive for A lumbricoides: 79 Number included in review: 79
Interventions	Treatment strategy: screening and treat all included participants Children aged 2–5 years Group 1: ivermectin 100 μg/kg single dose (n = 14) Group 2: ivermectin 200 μg/kg single dose (n = 9) Group 3: placebo single dose (n = 10) Children aged 6–12 years Group 4: ivermectin 200 μg/kg single dose (n = 14) Group 5: ivermectin 400 μg/kg single dose (n = 13) Group 6: ivermectin 600 μg/kg single dose (n = 8) Group 7: placebo (n = 11)
Outcomes	Outcomes included:Ascaris prevalence pre‐ and post‐treatment, cure rates, GM epg, adverse events Outcomes not included in review: anthelmintic efficacy for Trichuris, hookworm, andS mansoni
Notes	Diagnostic technique: Kato‐Katz Funding support: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Grant number: OPP1153928)
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Randomization was done using a computer‐generated code with varying random blocks sizes of four or eight for school aged children and of three or six for pre school aged children stratified by their baseline infection intensities (light or moderate plus heavy infection according to WHO guidelines."
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Details not reported.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Study‐site investigators were aware of the study‐group assignment."
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "laboratory technicians were blinded."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	10 (3.3%) participants lost at follow‐up and not included in analysis.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All stated outcomes were reported.
Other bias	Low risk	No obvious source of other bias.