Haas 1982.

Methods	Randomisation: implied randomisation. Blinding: double‐blind. Duration: 30 days. Design: parallel. Location: not indicated. Setting: inpatients.
Participants	Diagnosis (ICD‐8): schizophrenia: paranoid‐hallucinatory type (ICD 295.3) (N = 19), schizophrenia: chronic undifferentiated type (ICD 295.0) (N = 10), schizophrenia: schizoaffective type (ICD 295.7) (N = 1). N = 30. Gender: 13M, 17F. Age: mean 39 years. History: duration stable: not indicated, duration of illness: not indicated, number of previous hospitalisations: not indicated, age at onset: not indicated, severity of illness: not indicated, baseline antipsychotic dose: not indicated.
Interventions	1. Haloperidol: flexible dose, dose range: not indicated, mean final dose: 23.75 mg/day. N = 15.  2. Pimozide: flexible dose, dose range: not indicated, mean final dose: 20.36 mg/day. N 15. Allowed dose range: up to 60 mg/day for both drugs. “Initial dose for both drugs was 10–40 mg/day. This was increased up to the fifth day to 60 mg and then continued according to clinical needs.” Rescue medication: “Chloral hydrate (1,5/day) or, if necessary, promethazine (100mg/day) were given as sleep medication. Biperiden (2mg tablets was given if extrapyramidal signs were observed)."
Outcomes	Examined: Clinically important response to treatment: Overall clinical assessment at day 30. Mental state general: Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) (no SDs available). Leaving the study early due to any reason. Leaving the study early due to adverse effects. Adverse effects: akathisia, dyskinesia, rigor, tremor, use of antiparkinson medication, hypotension. Unable to use: Global state general: Clinical Global Impressions (CGI, modified severity scale) (modified version of the scale, no raw data available). Mental specific: ADMP (no results were provided).
Notes	Study participants were 30 “acutely hospitalised schizophrenic patients” (28 completers). No participant “received depot neuroleptics at least three weeks prior to hospitalisation”.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The trial authors did not explicitly mention a randomisation, but described a double‐blinding. Thus we implied that the study was randomised.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No further details.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) (performance bias)	Low risk	“Presentation of the drugs was identical in liquid form”
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) (detection bias)	Unclear risk	“Double‐blind”; No further details.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	There were no drop‐outs in the haloperidol‐group, but 2 of 15 (13.3%) participants left the trial early in the pimozide‐group. The overall‐attrition was 6.7% (2 of 30 participants). Altogether the attrition was rather low and the risk of bias might be considered as being low.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	The outcome data were not fully addressed (no SDs for the BPRS; no results for the ADMP‐rating; no raw data for the CGI).
Other bias	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to assess whether an important risk of bias exists.