Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies).

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 2 Leaving the study early.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 2 Leaving the study early.

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 3 Global State: No clinically important change (as defined by the original studies).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 3 Global State: No clinically important change (as defined by the original studies).

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 1a. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 1a. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 5 Mental state: 1b. General mental state: BPRS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 5 Mental state: 1b. General mental state: BPRS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 6 Mental state: 2a. Negative symptoms: no clinically important change (less than 50% PANSS negative subscore reduction).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 6 Mental state: 2a. Negative symptoms: no clinically important change (less than 50% PANSS negative subscore reduction).

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 7 Mental state: 2b. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 7 Mental state: 2b. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 8 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 8 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 9 Adverse effects: 2. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 9 Adverse effects: 2. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 10 Adverse effects: 3. Extrapyramidal side‐effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 10 Adverse effects: 3. Extrapyramidal side‐effects.

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 11 Adverse effects: 4. Sedation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 11 Adverse effects: 4. Sedation.

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 12 Adverse effects: 5. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE, Outcome 12 Adverse effects: 5. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight.

Comparison 2 ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE, Outcome 1 Leaving the study early.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE, Outcome 1 Leaving the study early.

Comparison 2 ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE, Outcome 2 Mental state: general mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE, Outcome 2 Mental state: general mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 2 ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE, Outcome 3 Adverse effects: cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE, Outcome 3 Adverse effects: cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 2 Leaving the study early.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 2 Leaving the study early.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 3 Global State: no clinically important change (as defined by the original studies).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 3 Global State: no clinically important change (as defined by the original studies).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 1a. General mental state: no clinically important change (less than 30% PANSS total score reduction).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 1a. General mental state: no clinically important change (less than 30% PANSS total score reduction).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 5 Mental state: 1b. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 5 Mental state: 1b. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 6 Mental state: 1c. General mental state: no clinically important change (less than 40% BPRS total score reduction).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 6 Mental state: 1c. General mental state: no clinically important change (less than 40% BPRS total score reduction).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 7 Mental state: 1d. General mental state: BPRS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 7 Mental state: 1d. General mental state: BPRS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 8 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 8 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 9 Mental state: 3. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 9 Mental state: 3. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 10 General Functioning: 1. No clinically important change (less than 5 points improvement on GAF total score).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.10

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 10 General Functioning: 1. No clinically important change (less than 5 points improvement on GAF total score).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 11 General Functioning: 2. GAF total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.11

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 11 General Functioning: 2. GAF total score (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 12 General Functioning: 3. QLS total score (Heinrichs‐Carpenter) (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.12

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 12 General Functioning: 3. QLS total score (Heinrichs‐Carpenter) (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 13 Cognitive Functioning: PANSS cognition score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.13

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 13 Cognitive Functioning: PANSS cognition score (high=poor).

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 14 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.14

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 14 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 15 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.15

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 15 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 16 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.16

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 16 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 17 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.17

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 17 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 18 Adverse effects: 3a. Cholesterol ‐ abnormally high cholesterol value.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.18

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 18 Adverse effects: 3a. Cholesterol ‐ abnormally high cholesterol value.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 19 Adverse effects: 3b. Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.19

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 19 Adverse effects: 3b. Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 20 Adverse effects: 4. Death.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.20

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 20 Adverse effects: 4. Death.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 21 Adverse effects: 5a. Extrapyramidal side‐effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.21

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 21 Adverse effects: 5a. Extrapyramidal side‐effects.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 22 Adverse effects: 5b. Extrapyramidal side‐effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.22

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 22 Adverse effects: 5b. Extrapyramidal side‐effects.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 23 Adverse effects: 6a. Glucose ‐ abnormally high fasting glucose value.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.23

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 23 Adverse effects: 6a. Glucose ‐ abnormally high fasting glucose value.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 24 Adverse effects: 6b. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.24

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 24 Adverse effects: 6b. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 25 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin‐associated side‐effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.25

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 25 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin‐associated side‐effects.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 26 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.26

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 26 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 27 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.27

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 27 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 28 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.28

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 28 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain.

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 29 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.29

Comparison 3 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE, Outcome 29 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 1 Leaving the study early.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 1 Leaving the study early.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 2 Mental state: 1. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 2 Mental state: 1. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 3 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 3 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 3. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 4 Mental state: 3. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 5 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 5 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 6 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 6 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 7 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 7 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 8 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.8

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 8 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 9 Adverse effects: 3. Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.9

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 9 Adverse effects: 3. Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 10 Adverse effects: 4. Death.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.10

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 10 Adverse effects: 4. Death.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 11 Adverse effects: 5. Extrapyramidal side effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.11

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 11 Adverse effects: 5. Extrapyramidal side effects.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 12 Adverse effects: 6. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.12

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 12 Adverse effects: 6. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 13 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin‐associated side‐effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.13

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 13 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin‐associated side‐effects.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 14 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.14

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 14 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 15 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.15

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 15 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 16 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.16

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 16 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight.

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 17 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.17

Comparison 4 ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE, Outcome 17 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 2 Leaving the study early.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 2 Leaving the study early.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 3 Global State: No clinically important change (as defined by the original studies).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 3 Global State: No clinically important change (as defined by the original studies).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 4 Mental State 1a. General Mental State (less than 50% PANSS total reduction).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 4 Mental State 1a. General Mental State (less than 50% PANSS total reduction).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 5 Mental State 1b. General Mental State: PANSS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 5 Mental State 1b. General Mental State: PANSS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 6 Mental State 1c. General Mental State: BPRS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.6

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 6 Mental State 1c. General Mental State: BPRS total score (high=poor).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 7 Mental State 2a. Positive Symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.7

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 7 Mental State 2a. Positive Symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 8 Mental State 2b. Positive Symptoms: BPRS positive subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.8

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 8 Mental State 2b. Positive Symptoms: BPRS positive subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 9 Mental State 3. Negative Symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.9

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 9 Mental State 3. Negative Symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor).

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 10 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.10

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 10 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 11 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.11

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 11 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 12 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.12

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 12 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 13 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.13

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 13 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 14 Adverse effects: 3 Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.14

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 14 Adverse effects: 3 Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 15 Adverse effects: 4. Death.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.15

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 15 Adverse effects: 4. Death.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 16 Adverse effects: 5a. Extrapyramidal side effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.16

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 16 Adverse effects: 5a. Extrapyramidal side effects.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 17 Adverse effects: 5b. Extrapyramidal side effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.17

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 17 Adverse effects: 5b. Extrapyramidal side effects.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 18 Adverse effects: 6. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.18

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 18 Adverse effects: 6. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 19 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin associated side effects.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.19

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 19 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin associated side effects.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 20 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.20

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 20 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 21 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.21

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 21 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 22 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.22

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 22 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight.

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 23 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.23

Comparison 5 ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE, Outcome 23 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg.

Comparison 6 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE ‐ sensitivity analysis (skewed data excluded), Outcome 1 Mental State: 1. General Mental State: PANSS total score (high=poor).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE ‐ sensitivity analysis (skewed data excluded), Outcome 1 Mental State: 1. General Mental State: PANSS total score (high=poor).

Table 1. Suggested design of future study

Methods

Allocation: randomised ‐ clearly described generation of sequence and concealment of allocation.
Blindness: double ‐ described and tested.
Duration: 6 months minimum.

Participants

Diagnosis: schizophrenia (operational criteria).
N=2700.*
Age: any.
Sex: both.
History: any.

Interventions

1. Ziprasidone: dose ˜ 120‐160 mg/day. N=300.
2. Amisulpride: dose ˜ 400‐800 mg/day. N=300.
3. Aripiprazole: dose ˜ 10‐30 mg/day. N=300.
4. Clozapine: dose ˜ 300‐800 mg/day. N=300.
5. Olanzapine: dose ˜ 10‐20 mg/day. N=300.
6. Quetiapine: dose ˜ 300‐800 mg/day. N=300.
7. Risperidone: dose ˜ 4‐8 mg/day. N=300.
8. Sertindole: dose ˜ 12‐24 mg/day. N=300.
9. Zotepine: dose ˜ 100‐300 mg/day. N=300.

Outcomes

Leaving study early: any reason, adverse events, inefficacy.
Service outcomes: hospitalised, time in hospital, attending out patient clinics.
Global impression: CGI**, relapse.
Mental state: PANSS.
Adverse events: UKU.
Employment, family satisfaction, patient satisfaction.

* power calculation suggested 300/group would allow good chance of showing a 10% difference between groups for primary outcome.
** Primary outcome

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Suggested design of future study
Comparison 1. ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies) Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.93, 1.19]

2 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Any reason

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.45 [0.78, 2.70]

2.2 Adverse events

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.79 [0.18, 3.37]

2.3 Inefficacy

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

4.73 [1.06, 20.98]

3 Global State: No clinically important change (as defined by the original studies) Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.11 [0.82, 1.51]

3.1 Short term

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.11 [0.82, 1.51]

4 Mental state: 1a. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

122

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.70 [‐3.55, 8.95]

4.1 Short term

1

122

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.70 [‐3.55, 8.95]

5 Mental state: 1b. General mental state: BPRS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

122

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.10 [‐1.52, 5.72]

5.1 Short term

1

122

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.10 [‐1.52, 5.72]

6 Mental state: 2a. Negative symptoms: no clinically important change (less than 50% PANSS negative subscore reduction) Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.93, 1.19]

6.1 Short term

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.93, 1.19]

7 Mental state: 2b. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

122

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.80 [‐1.40, 3.00]

7.1 Short term

1

122

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.80 [‐1.40, 3.00]

8 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.11 [0.82, 1.51]

9 Adverse effects: 2. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Adverse effects: 3. Extrapyramidal side‐effects Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

10.1 Akathisia

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.58 [0.27, 9.10]

10.2 Parkinsonism

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

6.30 [0.78, 50.80]

10.3 Use of antiparkinson medication

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.70 [0.94, 3.07]

11 Adverse effects: 4. Sedation Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.07, 1.67]

12 Adverse effects: 5. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight Show forest plot

1

123

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.18, 1.29]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. ZIPRASIDONE versus AMISULPRIDE
Comparison 2. ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

1

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.66, 1.51]

1.1 Any reason

1

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.66, 1.51]

2 Mental state: general mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

146

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.5 [‐7.72, 6.72]

2.1 Medium term

1

146

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.5 [‐7.72, 6.72]

3 Adverse effects: cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation Show forest plot

1

146

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. ZIPRASIDONE versus CLOZAPINE
Comparison 3. ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies) Show forest plot

2

817

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.20 [0.92, 1.56]

2 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

5

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Any reason

5

1937

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.26 [1.18, 1.35]

2.2 Adverse events

5

1937

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.77, 1.61]

2.3 Inefficacy

5

1937

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.57 [1.27, 1.94]

3 Global State: no clinically important change (as defined by the original studies) Show forest plot

1

269

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.92, 1.53]

3.1 Short term

1

269

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.92, 1.53]

4 Mental state: 1a. General mental state: no clinically important change (less than 30% PANSS total score reduction) Show forest plot

1

548

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.36 [1.15, 1.61]

4.1 Long term

1

548

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.36 [1.15, 1.61]

5 Mental state: 1b. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

4

1291

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

8.32 [5.64, 10.99]

5.1 Short term

1

48

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

8.37 [‐2.00, 18.74]

5.2 Medium term

1

201

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

6.50 [‐0.07, 13.07]

5.3 Long term

2

1042

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

8.71 [5.66, 11.76]

6 Mental state: 1c. General mental state: no clinically important change (less than 40% BPRS total score reduction) Show forest plot

1

269

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.07 [0.94, 1.21]

6.1 Short term

1

269

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.07 [0.94, 1.21]

7 Mental state: 1d. General mental state: BPRS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

251

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.5 [‐2.85, 3.85]

7.1 Short term

1

251

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.5 [‐2.85, 3.85]

8 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

2

730

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.11 [1.93, 4.30]

8.1 Medium term

1

201

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.6 [1.45, 5.75]

8.2 Long term

1

529

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.90 [1.47, 4.33]

9 Mental state: 3. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

2

730

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.68 [‐2.45, 3.81]

9.1 Medium term

1

201

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.00 [‐2.91, 0.91]

9.2 Long term

1

529

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.2 [0.92, 3.48]

10 General Functioning: 1. No clinically important change (less than 5 points improvement on GAF total score) Show forest plot

1

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.20 [1.03, 1.41]

10.1 Medium term

1

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.20 [1.03, 1.41]

11 General Functioning: 2. GAF total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

326

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.49 [0.64, 6.34]

12 General Functioning: 3. QLS total score (Heinrichs‐Carpenter) (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

393

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.70 [‐1.21, 8.61]

12.1 Long term

1

393

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.70 [‐1.21, 8.61]

13 Cognitive Functioning: PANSS cognition score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

529

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.40 [1.17, 3.63]

13.1 Long term

1

529

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.40 [1.17, 3.63]

14 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised Show forest plot

2

766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.54 [1.07, 2.20]

14.1 Medium term

1

245

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.45 [0.75, 2.79]

14.2 Long term

1

521

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.58 [1.03, 2.43]

15 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect Show forest plot

4

1583

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.94, 1.18]

16 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation Show forest plot

3

1184

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.58 [0.10, 24.68]

17 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms Show forest plot

4

1372

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.19 [‐0.58, 4.96]

18 Adverse effects: 3a. Cholesterol ‐ abnormally high cholesterol value Show forest plot

1

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.12, 4.15]

19 Adverse effects: 3b. Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl Show forest plot

4

1502

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐15.83 [‐25.72, ‐5.95]

20 Adverse effects: 4. Death Show forest plot

2

766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.60 [0.24, 10.45]

20.1 Suicide attempt

1

521

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.91 [0.08, 9.95]

20.2 Suicide

1

245

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

3.95 [0.19, 81.41]

21 Adverse effects: 5a. Extrapyramidal side‐effects Show forest plot

5

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

21.1 Akathisia

2

766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.41 [0.78, 2.53]

21.2 Dystonia

1

548

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

13.29 [0.75, 234.71]

21.3 Extrapyramidal symptoms

2

793

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.90 [0.77, 4.73]

21.4 Use of antiparkinson medication

4

1732

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.43 [1.03, 1.99]

22 Adverse effects: 5b. Extrapyramidal side‐effects Show forest plot

3

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

22.1 Abnormal involuntary movement: AIMS (high=poor)

2

925

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.16 [‐0.15, 0.46]

22.2 Akathisia: Barnes Akathisia Scale (high=poor)

2

924

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.07 [‐0.04, 0.17]

22.3 Extrapyramidal symptoms: ESRS total score (high=poor)

1

269

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.73, 1.53]

22.4 Extrapyramidal symptoms: Simpson‐Angus Scale (high=poor)

2

922

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.34 [‐0.13, 0.81]

23 Adverse effects: 6a. Glucose ‐ abnormally high fasting glucose value Show forest plot

1

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.15, 7.39]

24 Adverse effects: 6b. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl Show forest plot

4

1420

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐8.25 [‐13.72, ‐2.77]

25 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin‐associated side‐effects Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

25.1 Abnormally high prolactin value

1

394

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.59, 1.35]

25.2 Amenorrhoea

1

148

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.19 [0.51, 2.79]

25.3 Galactorrhoea

2

580

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.56 [0.53, 4.56]

25.4 Sexual dysfunction

2

766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.75 [0.56, 1.01]

26 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml Show forest plot

3

1079

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.20 [‐3.33, 3.72]

27 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation Show forest plot

2

766

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.64 [0.39, 1.04]

28 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain Show forest plot

4

1708

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.20 [0.14, 0.30]

28.1 Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight

3

1160

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.14, 0.33]

28.2 Weight gain ‐ as "weight gain" reported adverse event

1

548

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.06, 0.37]

29 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg Show forest plot

5

1659

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐3.82 [‐4.69, ‐2.96]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE
Comparison 4. ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 Any reason

2

722

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.88, 1.03]

1.2 Adverse events

2

722

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.67, 1.39]

1.3 Inefficacy

2

722

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.68, 1.12]

2 Mental state: 1. General mental state: PANSS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

2

710

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.11 [‐6.14, 6.36]

2.1 Medium term

1

198

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐3.70 [‐10.37, 2.97]

2.2 Long term

1

512

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.78 [‐1.25, 6.81]

3 Mental state: 2. Positive symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

198

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐2.18, 2.18]

3.1 Medium term

1

198

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐2.18, 2.18]

4 Mental state: 3. Negative symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

198

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.60 [‐3.54, 0.34]

4.1 Medium term

1

198

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.60 [‐3.54, 0.34]

5 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised Show forest plot

2

754

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.63, 1.17]

5.1 Medium term

1

232

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.46, 1.40]

5.2 Long term

1

522

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.61, 1.29]

6 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect Show forest plot

2

754

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.85, 1.10]

7 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation Show forest plot

1

522

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.12, 2.98]

8 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms Show forest plot

2

549

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐3.41 [‐8.18, 1.37]

9 Adverse effects: 3. Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl Show forest plot

2

754

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐16.01 [‐23.46, ‐8.57]

10 Adverse effects: 4. Death Show forest plot

2

754

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.45 [0.32, 18.83]

10.1 Suicide attempt

1

522

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.82 [0.11, 28.95]

10.2 Suicide

1

232

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

3.48 [0.17, 71.64]

11 Adverse effects: 5. Extrapyramidal side effects Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

11.1 Akathisia

2

754

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.28 [0.69, 2.39]

11.2 Extrapyramidal symptoms

1

232

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.50 [0.16, 1.51]

11.3 Use of antiparkinson medication

1

522

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.32 [1.07, 5.00]

12 Adverse effects: 6. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl Show forest plot

2

754

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐3.10 [‐10.19, 3.99]

13 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin‐associated side‐effects Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

13.1 Amenorrhoea

1

138

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.34 [0.81, 6.79]

13.2 Galactorrhoea

2

572

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.82 [0.60, 5.57]

13.3 Sexual dysfunction

1

522

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.64, 1.33]

14 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml Show forest plot

2

754

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

4.77 [1.37, 8.16]

15 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation Show forest plot

2

754

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.55, 0.97]

16 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight Show forest plot

2

754

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.45 [0.28, 0.74]

17 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg Show forest plot

1

466

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.2 [‐2.45, 0.05]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 4. ZIPRASIDONE versus QUETIAPINE
Comparison 5. ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 No clinically significant response (as defined by the original studies) Show forest plot

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.89, 1.07]

2 Leaving the study early Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Any reason

3

1029

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.11 [1.02, 1.20]

2.2 Adverse events

3

1029

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.23 [0.76, 1.98]

2.3 Inefficacy

3

1029

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.79, 1.66]

3 Global State: No clinically important change (as defined by the original studies) Show forest plot

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.96, 1.60]

3.1 Short term

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.24 [0.96, 1.60]

4 Mental State 1a. General Mental State (less than 50% PANSS total reduction) Show forest plot

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.89, 1.07]

4.1 Short term

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.89, 1.07]

5 Mental State 1b. General Mental State: PANSS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

3

1016

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.91 [0.27, 7.55]

5.1 Short term

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.5 [‐0.16, 3.16]

5.2 Medium term

1

204

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

6.30 [‐0.17, 12.77]

5.3 Long term

1

516

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

6.01 [1.99, 10.03]

6 Mental State 1c. General Mental State: BPRS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.70 [‐2.93, 4.33]

6.1 Short term

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.70 [‐2.93, 4.33]

7 Mental State 2a. Positive Symptoms: PANSS positive subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

204

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.5 [0.38, 4.62]

7.1 Medium term

1

204

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.5 [0.38, 4.62]

8 Mental State 2b. Positive Symptoms: BPRS positive subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.5 [‐0.15, 1.15]

8.1 Short term

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.5 [‐0.15, 1.15]

9 Mental State 3. Negative Symptoms: PANSS negative subscore (high=poor) Show forest plot

2

500

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.04 [‐1.12, 1.20]

9.1 Short term

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [‐1.48, 1.48]

9.2 Medium term

1

204

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐1.78, 1.98]

10 Service use: Number of patients re‐hospitalised Show forest plot

2

767

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.14 [0.82, 1.59]

10.1 Medium term

1

241

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.58, 1.89]

10.2 Long term

1

526

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.19 [0.80, 1.78]

11 Adverse effects: 1. At least one adverse effect Show forest plot

3

1063

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.86, 1.02]

12 Adverse effects: 2a. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc prolongation Show forest plot

2

822

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.11, 2.51]

13 Adverse effects: 2b. Cardiac effects ‐ QTc abnormalities ‐ change from baseline in ms Show forest plot

3

793

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.24 [‐1.92, 6.39]

14 Adverse effects: 3 Cholesterol ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl Show forest plot

2

767

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐8.58 [‐16.04, ‐1.11]

15 Adverse effects: 4. Death Show forest plot

2

767

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.18 [0.22, 6.42]

15.1 Suicide attempt

1

526

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.08, 10.10]

15.2 Suicide

1

241

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.52 [0.14, 16.52]

16 Adverse effects: 5a. Extrapyramidal side effects Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

16.1 Akathisia

3

1063

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.53, 1.81]

16.2 Extrapyramidal symptoms

1

241

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.32 [0.12, 0.87]

16.3 Tremor

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.53, 2.11]

16.4 Use of antiparkinson medication

2

822

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.51, 0.97]

17 Adverse effects: 5b. Extrapyramidal side effects Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

17.1 Abnormal involuntary movement: AIMS (high=poor)

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.21 [‐0.25, ‐0.17]

17.2 Akathisia: Barnes Akathisia Scale (high=poor)

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.56 [‐0.61, ‐0.51]

17.3 Extrapyramidal symptoms: Simpson‐Angus Scale (high=poor)

1

296

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.34 [‐0.42, ‐0.26]

18 Adverse effects: 6. Glucose ‐ change from baseline in mg/dl Show forest plot

2

767

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐4.94 [‐11.80, 1.91]

19 Adverse effects: 7a. Prolactin associated side effects Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

19.1 Abnormal ejaculation

1

215

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.15, 1.54]

19.2 Amenorrhoea

2

225

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.42, 1.68]

19.3 Decreased libido

1

296

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.61 [0.26, 1.42]

19.4 Erectile dysfunction

1

215

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.35, 2.63]

19.5 Galactorrhoea

3

303

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.25, 1.28]

19.6 Sexual dysfunction

2

822

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.69 [0.50, 0.97]

20 Adverse effects: 7b. Prolactin ‐ change from baseline in ng/ml Show forest plot

2

767

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐21.97 [‐27.34, ‐16.60]

21 Adverse effects: 8. Sedation Show forest plot

3

1063

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.87 [0.63, 1.20]

22 Adverse effects: 9a. Weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight Show forest plot

3

1063

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.49 [0.33, 0.74]

23 Adverse effects: 9b. Weight gain ‐ change from baseline in kg Show forest plot

1

461

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.1 [‐2.35, 0.15]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 5. ZIPRASIDONE versus RISPERIDONE
Comparison 6. ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE ‐ sensitivity analysis (skewed data excluded)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mental State: 1. General Mental State: PANSS total score (high=poor) Show forest plot

3

1243

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.32 [5.55, 11.08]

1.1 Medium term

1

201

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

6.50 [‐0.07, 13.07]

1.2 Long term

2

1042

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.71 [5.66, 11.76]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 6. ZIPRASIDONE versus OLANZAPINE ‐ sensitivity analysis (skewed data excluded)