Background: The aim of the study was assessment of defaults and conducted meta-analysis of the efficacy of single-dose oral albendazole against infection.Methods: We searched PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Science Direct, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and WHO library databases between 1983 and 2014. Data from 13 clinical trial articles were used. Each article was included the effect of single oral dose (400 mg) albendazole and placebo in treating two groups of patients with infection. For both groups in each article, sample size, the number of those with infection, and the number of those recovered following the intake of albendazole were identified and recorded. The relative risk and variance were computed. Funnel plot, Beggs and Eggers tests were used for assessment of publication bias. The random effect variance shift outlier model and likelihood ratio test were applied for detecting outliers. In order to detect influence, DFFITS values, Cook's distances and COVRATIO were used. Data were analyzed using STATA and R software.Results: The article number 13 and 9 were outlier and influence, respectively. Outlier is diagnosed by variance shift of target study in inferential method and by RR value in graphical method. Funnel plot and Beggs test did not show the publication bias (=0.272). However, the Eggers test confirmed it (=0.034). Meta-analysis after removal of article 13 showed that relative risk was 1.99 (CI 95% 1.71 - 2.31).Conclusion: The estimated RR and our meta-analyses show that treatment of with single oral doses of albendazole is unsatisfactory. New anthelminthics are urgently needed.