Abstract:
The Cochrane Library has recently published a 160-page, updated systematic review on deworming drugs for soil-transmitted intestinal worms in children, which concludes, “Treating children known to have worm infection may have some nutritional benefits for the individual. However, in mass treatment of all children in endemic areas, there is now substantial evidence that this does not improve average nutritional status, haemoglobin, cognition, school performance, or survival”.
The Cochrane Review methodology dictates that only randomized controlled trials that meet very strict criteria should be included. Accordingly, of the 59 records identified in the search for the period of the current update (2012–2015), only ten full text articles have been assessed for eligibility, and only four of these have been included in the final analysis. The four studies that are newly included are clearly identifiable, but the list of studies excluded from the review does not appear to be complete, in that it has only one from the period 2012–2015.
This omission raises doubts regarding the rigor with which the review has been conducted.
While acknowledging the fact that other Cochrane systematic reviews have been of great value in assessing the effectiveness of more conventional forms of drug therapy, the authors are of the strong view that the Cochrane Systematic Review methodology is not appropriate for assessing the impact of mass deworming programmes in endemic communities in developing countries.
BT - PLoS neglected tropical diseases C1 -http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26492484?dopt=Abstract
DO - 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004203 IS - 10 J2 - PLoS Negl Trop Dis LA - eng M3 - commentary N2 -Abstract:
The Cochrane Library has recently published a 160-page, updated systematic review on deworming drugs for soil-transmitted intestinal worms in children, which concludes, “Treating children known to have worm infection may have some nutritional benefits for the individual. However, in mass treatment of all children in endemic areas, there is now substantial evidence that this does not improve average nutritional status, haemoglobin, cognition, school performance, or survival”.
The Cochrane Review methodology dictates that only randomized controlled trials that meet very strict criteria should be included. Accordingly, of the 59 records identified in the search for the period of the current update (2012–2015), only ten full text articles have been assessed for eligibility, and only four of these have been included in the final analysis. The four studies that are newly included are clearly identifiable, but the list of studies excluded from the review does not appear to be complete, in that it has only one from the period 2012–2015.
This omission raises doubts regarding the rigor with which the review has been conducted.
While acknowledging the fact that other Cochrane systematic reviews have been of great value in assessing the effectiveness of more conventional forms of drug therapy, the authors are of the strong view that the Cochrane Systematic Review methodology is not appropriate for assessing the impact of mass deworming programmes in endemic communities in developing countries.
PY - 2015 EP - e0004203 T2 - PLoS neglected tropical diseases TI - Cochrane reviews on deworming and the right to a healthy, worm-free life. UR - http://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0004203 VL - 9 SN - 1935-2735 ER -