MacIntyre 2016.

Study characteristics
Methods	Cluster‐RCT to examine medical mask use as source control for people with respiratory illness in 6 major hospitals in 2 districts of Beijing, China. Index cases with ILI were randomly allocated to medical mask (n = 123) and control arms (n = 122). Since 43 index cases in the control arm also used a mask during the study period, an as‐treated post hoc analysis was performed by comparing outcomes amongst household members of index cases who used a mask (mask group) with household members of index cases who did not use a mask (no mask group).
Participants	245 index cases with ILI (medical mask = 123, control group = 122) and 597 household contacts (medical mask = 302, control group = 295)
Interventions	Medical mask versus no mask (control). See Table 4 for details.
Outcomes	Clinical respiratory illness, ILI, and laboratory‐confirmed viral respiratory infection Clinical respiratory illness, defined as 2 or more respiratory symptoms (cough, nasal congestion, runny nose, sore throat, or sneezes) or 1 respiratory symptom and a systemic symptom (chill, lethargy, loss of appetite, abdominal pain, muscle or joint aches). ILI, defined as fever ≥ 38 °C plus 1 respiratory symptom. Laboratory‐confirmed viral respiratory infection, defined as detection of adenoviruses, human metapneumovirus, coronaviruses 229E/NL63 and OC43/HKU1, parainfluenza viruses 1, 2, and 3, influenza viruses A and B, respiratory syncytial virus A and B, or rhinovirus A/B by nucleic acid testing using a commercial multiplex PCR. No safety outcomes reported.
Notes	Government funded. Competing interests: all authors have completed the Unified Competing Interests form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare that: CRM has held an Australian Research Council Linkage Grant with 3M as the industry partner, for investigator driven research. 3M have also contributed supplies of masks and respirators for investigator‐driven clinical trials. She has received research grants and laboratory testing as in‐kind support from Pfizer, GSK and Bio‐CSL for investigator‐driven research. HS had an NHMRC Australian based Public Health Training Fellowship at the time of the study (1012631). She has also received funding from vaccine manufacturers GSK, bio‐CSL and Saniofi Pasteur for investigator‐driven research and presentations. AAC had testing of filtration of masks by 3M for PhD.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Random allocation sequence using Microsoft Excel
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Doctors enrolled the participants randomly to intervention and control arms.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Unblinded study
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Clinical endpoints assessed unblinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No loss to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Specified outcomes reported.