Summary of findings for the main comparison. Trifluoperazine versus low‐potency antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia.
| Trifluoperazine versus low‐potency antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia | ||||||
| Patient or population: patients with schizophrenia Settings: Inpatients and outpatients Intervention: Trifluoperazine versus low‐potency antipsychotic drugs | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Control | Trifluoperazine versus low‐potency antipsychotic drugs | |||||
| Response to treatment ‐ medium term Follow‐up: 4‐6 months | Study population | RR 0.96 (0.59 to 1.56) | 120 (3 studies) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2 | ||
| 364 per 1000 | 349 per 1000 (215 to 567) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 350 per 1000 | 336 per 1000 (206 to 546) | |||||
| Leaving the study early: 1. Acceptability of treatment ‐ leaving early due to any reason Follow‐up: 1‐4 months | Study population | RR 1.25 (0.72 to 2.17) | 239 (3 studies) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2 | ||
| 160 per 1000 | 200 per 1000 (115 to 348) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 182 per 1000 | 228 per 1000 (131 to 395) | |||||
| Adverse events: 1. General ‐ at least one adverse effect Follow‐up: mean 4 months | Study population | RR 1.6 (0.94 to 2.74) | 60 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1 | ||
| 375 per 1000 | 600 per 1000 (352 to 1000) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 375 per 1000 | 600 per 1000 (352 to 1000) | |||||
| Adverse events: 2.a. Specific ‐ movement disorders ‐ at least one movement disorder Follow‐up: 6‐26 weeks | Study population | RR 2.08 (0.78 to 5.55) | 123 (2 studies) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,3 | ||
| 89 per 1000 | 186 per 1000 (70 to 496) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 50 per 1000 | 104 per 1000 (39 to 278) | |||||
| Death | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | 0 (04) | See comment | |
| Sedation | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | 0 (05) | See comment | |
| Quality of life | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | 0 (05) | See comment | |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the 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; RR: Risk ratio; | ||||||
| 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. | ||||||
1 Risk of bias: rated 'serious' ‐ most information is from studies at unclear risk of bias, missing or unclear results for incomplete outcome data and selective reporting 2 Imprecision: rated 'serious' ‐ the total number of events is less than 300 and the estimate of effect includes appreciable benefit/harm. 3 Imprecision: rated 'serious' ‐ the total number of events is less than 300 and the CI is quite wide 4 There were no data for this very important outcome 5 There were no data for this outcome