Nachshoni 2005.

Methods	Allocation: randomised. Blindness: double. Duration: 7 days. Funded by: no extramural funding (source: study author).
Participants	Diagnosis: schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder. SCID, DSM III‐R. N = 34. Age: average ˜ 40 years (SD ˜ 12), range 19 to 64 years. Sex: 23 M, 7 F. Setting: inpatient. History: unclear. Excluded: receiving steroids, pregnant women, patients engaged in substance abuse, patients with significant medical or neurological illness. Country: Israel.
Interventions	1. DHEA: dose 100 mg/day( 50 mg bid at 8am and 8pm). N = 18. 2. Placebo: N = 16. Other concurrent treatments: All participants had received fixed doses of antipsychotic medications for at least 3 weeks before study commencement, and no change in dosage or medication was permitted for the trial duration. Anti‐EPS agents were withdrawn with a 2‐day washout period before randomisation.
Outcomes	Mental state: total psychotic symptoms (BPRS). General functioning: GAF. Adverse events: general adverse events and general extrapyramidal symptoms (SHRS). Unable to use: adverse events ‐ extrapyramidal symptoms ‐ UKU (not reported).
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "subjects were randomised (by means of random number generation)..." (pg 252).
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote (from correspondence): "Randomization numbers provided by statistician to research assistant assigning study medication and maintained under lock and key in concealed fashion."
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Participant/providers: Yes. Quote: "...randomised to receive either DHEA at a fixed dose of 100 mg/day or placebo in double‐blind fashion..." (pg 252). Outcome assessors blind (from correspondence).
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "double‐blind" ‐ probably undertaken.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Outcome assessors blind (from correspondence).
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Missing outcome data for 4 participants not accounted for in analysis.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Study authors unable to analyse tardive dyskinesia or dystonia because few participants had tardive dyskinesia (10%) or dystonia (0%). UKU scores not reported.
Other bias	High risk	Only 11/30 participants exhibited akathisia, and slight differences in baseline akathisia symptoms were noted between groups. Sample size was small and the intervention was of short duration.