Summary of findings 2. Any antiglucocorticoid compared with placebo as adjunct to atypical antipsychotic treatment (data only for DHEA) for psychosis.

Any antiglucocorticoid compared with placebo as adjunct to atypical antipsychotic treatment (data only for DHEA) for psychosis
Patient or population: people with psychosis Settings: inpatient/outpatient Intervention: any antiglucocorticoid Comparison: placebo as adjunct to atypical antipsychotic treatment (data only for DHEA)
Outcomes	Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	Number of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Placebo as adjunct to atypical antipsychotic treatment (data only for DHEA)	Any antiglucocorticoid
Mental state: 1. General ‐ average endpoint score PANSS total Follow‐up: 12 weeks		Mean mental state: 1. General ‐ average endpoint score in intervention groups was 1.7 lower (10.78 lower to 7.38 higher)		40 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b
Mental state: 2. Specific ‐ negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score PANSS subscale Follow‐up: 12 weeks		Mean mental state: 2. Specific ‐ negative symptoms ‐ average endpoint score in intervention groups was 0.7 higher (2.63 lower to 4.03 higher)		40 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b
Global state: general ‐ no clinically significant improvement	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	0 (0)	See comment	No study reported this outcome
General functioning: improved to an important degree	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	0 (0)	See comment	No study reported this outcome
Adverse effects: specific: extrapyramidal symptoms ‐ average endpoint scores parkinsonism SAS total Follow‐up: 12 weeks		Mean adverse effects: extrapyramidal symptoms ‐ average endpoint scores parkinsonism in intervention groups was 0 higher (0.88 lower to 0.88 higher)		40 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b
Quality of life: improved to an important degree	See comment	See comment	Not estimable	0 (0)	See comment	No study reported this outcome
*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. 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). CI: Confidence interval.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

^aRisk of bias: rated 'serious' ‐ small study with some imbalance in groups.
 ^bImprecision: rated 'serious' ‐ small study.