Efecto de la desparasitación masiva con antihelmínticos para las helmintiasis transmitidas a través del suelo durante el embarazo
Referencias
Referencias de los estudios incluidos en esta revisión
Referencias de los estudios excluidos de esta revisión
Referencias de los estudios en curso
Referencias adicionales
Referencias de otras versiones publicadas de esta revisión
Characteristics of studies
Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: randomised controlled trial Unit of randomisation: individual | |
| Participants | Location/Setting: University of Calabar Teaching Hospital Antenatal Clinic, a tertiary health facility in Calabar Metropolis, the capital of Cross River State which is located in South‐South Zone of Nigeria Sample size: 560 healthy pregnant women in their second trimester Dropouts/withdrawals: 39 Mean age: 29.3 years (± 4.4 years) Inclusion criteria: 1) consenting women; 2) gestational age from 14 weeks to 28 weeks by last menstrual period or ultrasound, and 3) singleton pregnancy Exclusion criteria: 1) history of vaginal bleeding in current pregnancy; 2) medical, surgical or obstetric complication; 3) diagnosed or suspected multiple pregnancies; 4) women with haemoglobinopathy; 5) women with moderate to severe anaemia; and 6) allergy to mebendazole or sulphadoxine | |
| Interventions | Intervention: (n = 300) A single 500 mg oral dose of mebendazole plus a daily iron supplement, (60 mg elemental iron) and folic acid Control: (n = 260) A single dose placebo plus a daily iron supplement (60 mg elemental iron) and folic acid Intervention was administered after the first trimester of pregnancy. | |
| Outcomes | Outcomes: maternal and perinatal outcomes including prevalence of peripartum anaemia (PCV < 33%), mode of delivery postpartum haemorrhage, and other maternal morbidity like puerperal pyrexia; perinatal outcome included the proportion of low birthweight, birth asphyxia, congenital abnormally and perinatal mortality Timing of outcome assessment: delivery and immediate postpartum period | |
| Notes | Study start date: 1 January 2015 Study end date: 31 December 2015 Funding source: this research did not receive any financial support. Conflicts of interest: the authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Comment: none | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Computer‐generated random numbers were used for sampling." Comment: adequately done |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Single tablet (500 mg) of mebendazole was wrapped in a paper and labelled with a number for identification from the placebo which was also wrapped with same paper to blind the patients and the dispenser." Comment: adequately done |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Single tablet (500 mg) of mebendazole was wrapped in a paper and labelled with a number for identification from the placebo which was also wrapped with same paper to blind the patients and the dispenser." Comment: adequately done |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Single tablet (500 mg) of mebendazole was wrapped in a paper and labelled with a number for identification from the placebo which was also wrapped with same paper to blind the patients and the dispenser." Comment: adequately done |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Comment: 39/360 (10.83%) loss to follow‐up |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: trial registration not reported. Outcome specified in the methods section have been reported in the results section. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: no other biases identified. |
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: randomised controlled trial Unit of randomisation: individual | |
| Participants | Location/Setting: Sree Balaji Medical College And Hospital, Chennai, India Sample size: 500 pregnant women Dropouts/Withdrawals: no dropouts Mean age: not specified Inclusion criteria: women were eligible if they were healthy on recruitment day, a resident in the study area, planning to deliver at the hospital, willing to know their HIV status, prepared to participate in the study, and in their second or third trimester (based on last menstrual period and midwife's assessment) Exclusion criteria: haemoglobin level < 8 g/dL, clinically apparent severe liver disease, history of diarrhoea with blood in stool, abnormal pregnancy, previous adverse reaction to anthelminthics, or enrolment during a previous pregnancy. | |
| Interventions | Intervention: (number of participants in each group was not specified) A: Albendazole (400 mg) and placebo B: Mebendazole (100 mg BD for 3 days) and placebo C: Albendazole and mebendazole Control: placebo and placebo | |
| Outcomes | Outcomes: anaemia, birthweight, low birthweight TIming of outcome assessment: at the time of delivery | |
| Notes | Study start date: August 2011 Study end date: February 2012 Funding source: not specified Conflict of interest: not specified | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "The randomisation sequence was prepared with blocks of 100 by the trial statistician with use of Stata, version 7 (Stata)." Comment: adequately done |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Researchers in SBMCH who were not otherwise involved in the study prepared opaque, sealed envelopes numbered with the randomisation code that contained albendazole tablets (GlaxoSmithKline) or matching placebo and 12 capsules of Mebendazole 100mg or matching placebo." Comment: adequately done |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Staff and participants were blinded to the treatment allocation" Comment: adequately done |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Staff and participants were blinded to the treatment allocation" Comment: adequately done |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Comment: there was no loss to follow‐up |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Comment: trial registration not specified. Outcomes are not reported according to the intervention group assignment. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: no other biases identified |
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial Unit of randomisation: individual | |
| Participants | Location/Setting: Entebbe Hospital, Uganda Sample size: 2507 pregnant women Dropouts/Withdrawals: 159 Mean age: 23.5 years Inclusion criteria: mothers in the second trimester of pregnancy, residing in the study area, planning to deliver in hospital and willing to know their HIV status were eligible for inclusion in the study. Exclusion criteria: mothers with Hb < 8 g/dL were excluded and treated for hookworm and anaemia. Other exclusion criteria were abnormal pregnancy or history of adverse reaction to antihelminthic drugs. | |
| Interventions | Intervention: A: albendazole (400 mg) and placebo (n = 629) B: praziquantel (40 mg/kg) and placebo (n = 628) C: albendazole and praziquantel (n = 628) Control: placebo/placebo (n = 630) All women received a month’s supply of daily ferrous sulphate (200 mg; 60 mg elemental iron) and folic acid (0.25 mg) at each antenatal visit and intermittent presumptive sulphadoxine pyrimethamine treatment for malaria twice after the first trimester. For analysis, we have merged the data for groups A and C as intervention group and compared it with the placebo/placebo group. | |
| Outcomes | Outcomes: immune responses in mothers and infants, infant response to immunisation, infant eczema, maternal anaemia, birthweight, perinatal mortality, congenital anomalies, infant motor and neurocognitive function. Timings of outcome assessment: at delivery, infant survival at one week and infant assessment at 1 and 5 years of age. | |
| Notes | Study start date: April 2003 Study end date: November 2005 Funding source: Wellcome Trust Fellowship (064693 to first author); albendazole and matching placebo were provided by GlaxoSmithKline. Conflict of interest: All authors declared no conflict of interest. Comment: as a preliminary study, 103 were randomised to treatment with single‐dose albendazole (400 mg) or placebo. Study enrolment was then stopped due to new guidelines by the World Health Organization which recommended inclusion of treatment of women with schistosomiasis. The protocol was revised and then a total of 2507 participants were assigned to receive albendazole (400 mg) and placebo, praziquantel (40 mg/kg) and placebo, albendazole and praziquantel, or placebo and placebo. | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "The randomisation sequence was prepared with blocks of 100 by the trial statistician". Comment: adequately done. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Researchers in Entebbe who were not otherwise involved in the study prepared opaque, sealed envelopes numbered with the randomisation code". Comment: adequately done. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) | Low risk | Quote: "double blind"; "contained albendazole tablets or matching placebo and praziquantel (300 mg; Medochemie) or matching placebo" "Staff and participants were blinded to the treatment allocation". Comment: adequately done. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "All other staff and participants remain blinded to treatment allocation as follow up continues". Comment: adequately done. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Comment: Placebo/placebo: 37/630: 5.8% Albendazole/placebo: 44/629: 6.9% Placebo/praziquantel: 41/628: 6.5% Albendazole/praziquantel: 37/628: 5.8% |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Comment: trial registration reported (ISRCTN32849447). Authors reported all the outcomes mentioned in the protocol. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: study enrolment was stopped after 104 women due to new guidelines by the World Health Organization which recommended inclusion of treatment of women with schistosomiasis. |
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial Unit of randomisation: individual | |
| Participants | Location/Setting: 12 health centres in the Iquitos region of Peru Sample size: 1042 second trimester pregnant women Dropouts/Withdrawals: 36 Mean age: 25.3 years Inclusion criteria: pregnant women in second trimester (>= 18 weeks; < 26 weeks) between 18 and 44 years of age (gestational age was assessed by using a combination of fundal height and the first day of last menstrual period); not having received anthelminthic treatment for 6 months prior to recruitment; residing in rural or peri‐urban areas (defined as having no running water or flushing toilet facility at home) and giving consent. Exclusion criteria: any participants having severe anaemia (Hb < 7 g/dL) or a medical condition requiring follow‐up were excluded. | |
| Interventions | Intervevention: (n = 522) Intervention group received a single dose of mebendazole (500 mg) plus a daily iron supplement (60 mg elemental iron, ferrous sulphate). Control: (n = 520) Control group received a single dose placebo plus a daily iron supplement (60 mg elemental iron, ferrous sulphate). | |
| Outcomes | Outcomes: mean infant birthweight, low birthweight, maternal anaemia in third trimester Timing of outcome assessment: at delivery | |
| Notes | Study start date: April 2003 Study end date: July 2004 Funding source: funding was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) (grant no. MCT 53575). Conflict of interest: not specified | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "computer‐generated randomly ordered blocks of 4, 6 and 8 were used to randomly allocate women to each intervention group". Comment: adequately done. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "2 researchers not otherwise involved in the trial prepared sealed envelopes containing the intervention assignment". Comment: adequately done. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) | Low risk | Quote: "double‐blind"; ''the local project director, field workers, obstetrics, laboratory technologists and pregnant women were all blind to the group assignment"; and "placebo tablets were similar in appearance, smell and taste to the mebendazole tablets". Comment: adequately done. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) | Low risk | Quote: ''the local project director, field workers, obstetrics, laboratory technologists and pregnant women were all blind to the group assignment". Comment: adequately done. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Comment: 36/1042 (3.4%) lost to follow‐up |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Comment: trial registry specified (ISRCTN08446014). Outcomes mentioned in the methods section were presented in the results. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: the study appears to be free of other sources of bias. |
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: randomised controlled trial Unit of randomisation: individual | |
| Participants | Location/Setting: 3 antenatal clinics in peri‐urban Freetown and 6 in rural areas in Port Loko District, Sierra Leone Sample size: 184 pregnant women Dropouts/Withdrawals: 53 Mean age: 25.1 (SD 5.5) years Inclusion criteria: women with a Hb >= 8 g/dL and gestational age < 14 weeks at baseline were eligible for the study. Exclusion criteria: any women with Hb < 8 g/dL at any stage of the study was treated immediately with appropriate therapy and withdrawn from the study in accordance with World Health Organization ethical guidelines. | |
| Interventions | Intervention: Group A (FeA): daily iron folate supplements (Fe) 36 mg and single‐dose albendazole (A) 2 × 200 mg Group B (FeC): daily iron folate supplements (Fe) 36 mg and placebo control in place of albendazole (C) (tablets containing calcium with vitamin D) Group C: (CA): placebo control in place of iron folate (C) (calciferol tablets (1.25 mg)) and single‐dose albendazole (A) 2 × 200 mg Control: Placebo controls for iron folate supplement and Albendazole Intervention was administered after the first trimester of pregnancy. | |
| Outcomes | Outcomes: maternal anaemia, iron deficiency and anaemia, cure rate, egg reduction rate Timing of outcome assessment: Third trimester, within one week of delivery, and one month post partum. | |
| Notes | Study start date: December 1995 Study end date: June 1996 Funding source: the study was funded by a research grant from the Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, UK. Conflict of interest: not specified In this review, we included following comparisons. Torlesse 2001 (1): albendazole and daily iron folate versus daily iron folate and calcium vitamin D tablets as albendazole control (Group A versus Group B) Torlesse 2001 (2): albendazole and calciferol tablets as iron folate control versus calcium vitamin D tablets as albendazole control and calciferol tablets as iron folate control (Group C versus Control). | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Intervention groups were allocated using random number tables to generate the random‐number sequence". Comment: adequately done. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "intervention groups were allocated using random number tables to generate the random‐number sequence". Comment: not specified |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Albendazole and control calcium with vitamin D tablets used were similar in colour, shape and size"; "calciferol tablets which were used as control for iron folate supplements were similar to the iron supplements in shape and size but were different in colour". Comment: adequately done. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Albendazole and control calcium with vitamin D tablets used were similar in colour, shape and size"; "calciferol tablets which were used as control for iron folate supplements were similar to the iron supplements in shape and size but were different in colour". Comment: adequately done. |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | High risk | Comment: 53/184 (28.8%) loss to follow‐up. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: Study protocol was not available and trial registration details not specified, but outcomes mentioned in the methods section were presented in the results. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: no other biases identified. |
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: cluster‐randomised controlled trial Unit of randomisation: cluster (health institutions) | |
| Participants | Location/Setting: 16 health institutions in Rufiji district, Tanzania Sample size: 3080 pregnant women Dropouts/Withdrawals: 651 Mean age: median age 22 years Inclusion criteria: pregnant women booking for antenatal care for the first time after first trimester but before 24 weeks of pregnancy Exclusion criteria: women with haemoglobin < 60 g/l were excluded from the study. | |
| Interventions | Intervention: (n = 1475) Study arm received albendazole Control: (n = 1605) Control arm received placebo All women also received routine daily iron folate supplements (36 mg iron and 5 mg folate), and sulphadoxine pyrimethamine to prevent malaria. | |
| Outcomes | Outcomes: prevalence of anaemia at term and 4 months postpartum, haemoglobin Timing of outcome assessment: at booking, at term and at 4 months postpartum | |
| Notes | Study start date: March 2001 Study end date: February 2003 Funding source: Swedish agency for research and co‐operation with developing countries (Sida‐SAREC) Conflict of interest: not specified | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "out of the 16 eligible health institutions eight were allocated to the study and control arms" Comment: randomisation not specified |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: "out of the 16 eligible health institutions eight were allocated to the study and control arms" Comment: allocation not specified |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) | Low risk | Quote: "The placebo was made up of starch with the same size and colour as the true albendazole and it was supplied by the same company that supplied albendazole tablets." "The study was single blinded i.e. neither the health worker nor the participants were aware of the intervention allocation" Comment: adequately done |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) | High risk | Quote: "The study was single blinded i.e. neither the health worker nor the participants were aware of the intervention allocation. Only the principal investigator who made the randomisation and was supplying the drugs knew which heath institutions received albendazole and which one received placebo" Comment: not done |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) | Low risk | Comment: 651/3080 (21.1%) loss to follow‐up. The study reported no difference between the women remaining in the study arm versus those lost to follow up and attrition was below 25%. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: trial registration details not specified, but outcomes specified in the methodology section were reported in the results section. |
| Other bias | Low risk | Comment: no other biases identified. The study used appropriate methods for cluster adjustment of the sample size and estimates reported are cluster‐adjusted. |
Hb: haemoglobin
LBW: low birthweight
PCV: packed cell volume
SD: standard deviation
VLBW: very low birthweight
Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]
| Study | Reason for exclusion |
| 380,000 participants including men, women and children with mass population drug administration of albendazole ‐ so participants and study design not eligible. End date 2013. | |
| This study focused only on the efficacy of mefloquine and did not report any of the primary or secondary outcomes of the review. | |
| The study compared different regimens of antihelminthic treatment (single dose versus 3 days mebendazole). There was no appropriate control group. | |
| This study focused on deworming for Schistosomiasis not STH. | |
| This study focused on HIV‐infected women. | |
| This study focused on deworming for postpartum women. | |
| Withdrawn due to Covid‐19, no participants enrolled. | |
| The study randomised women infected with any STH to three treatment arms and compared them to a reference group without any STH. | |
| This study assessed the antihelminthic efficacy of a single dose of albendazole in communities and did not specifically target pregnant women. | |
| Published abstract with insufficient information available. | |
| Published abstract with insufficient information available. |
STH: soil‐transmitted helminths
Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]
| Study name | Parasitic Infection in Anemic Pregnant Women |
| Methods | Randomized, parallel open label |
| Participants | 200 women, second or third trimester pregnancy with an Hb of below 10.5 mg /dL. |
| Interventions | Group A: iron + antiparasitic treatment as follows:
Group B: received iron only |
| Outcomes | Hb above 11.0 mg/dL |
| Starting date | Estimated end date: September 2021 |
| Contact information | Ahmed Maged, MD 01005227404 [email protected] |
| Notes |
Data and analyses
| Outcome or subgroup title | No. of studies | No. of participants | Statistical method | Effect size |
| 1.1 Maternal anaemia in third trimester (< 11 g/dL) Show forest plot | 5 | 5745 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.85 [0.72, 1.00] |
| Analysis 1.1  Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 1: Maternal anaemia in third trimester (< 11 g/dL) | ||||
| 1.2 Preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks of gestation) Show forest plot | 1 | 1042 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) | 0.84 [0.38, 1.86] |
| Analysis 1.2  Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 2: Preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks of gestation) | ||||
| 1.3 Perinatal mortality Show forest plot | 3 | 3356 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) | 1.01 [0.67, 1.52] |
| Analysis 1.3  Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 3: Perinatal mortality | ||||
| 1.4 Maternal worm prevalence Show forest plot | 2 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | Subtotals only | |
| Analysis 1.4  Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 4: Maternal worm prevalence | ||||
| 1.4.1 Trichuris trichiura | 2 | 2488 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.68 [0.48, 0.98] |
| 1.4.2 Ascaris lumbricoides | 2 | 2488 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.24 [0.19, 0.29] |
| 1.4.3 Hookworm | 2 | 2488 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.31 [0.05, 1.93] |
| 1.5 Low birthweight Show forest plot | 3 | 2960 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) | 0.89 [0.69, 1.16] |
| Analysis 1.5  Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 5: Low birthweight | ||||
| 1.6 Birthweight Show forest plot | 3 | 2960 | Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) | 0.00 [‐0.03, 0.04] |
| Analysis 1.6  Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 6: Birthweight | ||||
Study flow diagram.
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study
Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 1: Maternal anaemia in third trimester (< 11 g/dL)
Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 2: Preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks of gestation)
Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 3: Perinatal mortality
Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 4: Maternal worm prevalence
Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 5: Low birthweight
Comparison 1: Antihelminthics versus control, Outcome 6: Birthweight
| Antihelminthics versus control for soil‐transmitted helminths during pregnancy | ||||||
| Patient or population: pregnant women in second trimester of pregnancy Comparison: placebo/control | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect | No of participants | Quality of the evidence | Comments | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Control | Antihelminthics | |||||
| Maternal anaemia in third trimester (< 11 g/dL) | Study population | RR 0.85 | 5745 | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ | ||
| 447 per 1000 | 383 per 1000 | |||||
| Preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks of gestation) | Study population | RR 0.84 | 1042 | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ | ||
| 25 per 1000 | 21 per 1000 | |||||
| Perinatal mortality | Study population | RR 1.01 | 3356 | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ | ||
| 28 per 1000 | 30 per 1000 | |||||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence | ||||||
| aDowngraded by one level for serious limitations in study design (high risk of attrition bias in Torlesse 2001 and high risk from lack of blinding in Urassa 2011). | ||||||
| Outcome or subgroup title | No. of studies | No. of participants | Statistical method | Effect size |
| 1.1 Maternal anaemia in third trimester (< 11 g/dL) Show forest plot | 5 | 5745 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.85 [0.72, 1.00] |
| 1.2 Preterm birth (birth before 37 weeks of gestation) Show forest plot | 1 | 1042 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) | 0.84 [0.38, 1.86] |
| 1.3 Perinatal mortality Show forest plot | 3 | 3356 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) | 1.01 [0.67, 1.52] |
| 1.4 Maternal worm prevalence Show forest plot | 2 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | Subtotals only | |
| 1.4.1 Trichuris trichiura | 2 | 2488 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.68 [0.48, 0.98] |
| 1.4.2 Ascaris lumbricoides | 2 | 2488 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.24 [0.19, 0.29] |
| 1.4.3 Hookworm | 2 | 2488 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) | 0.31 [0.05, 1.93] |
| 1.5 Low birthweight Show forest plot | 3 | 2960 | Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) | 0.89 [0.69, 1.16] |
| 1.6 Birthweight Show forest plot | 3 | 2960 | Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) | 0.00 [‐0.03, 0.04] |
