Clonazepam 2007a, CHN.

Study characteristics
Methods	Allocation: randomised. Blinding: double blinding, not state who was blinded. Design: parallel. Duration: 24 hours. Setting: inpatients, Chinese hospital.
Participants	Diagnosis: schizophrenia (CCMD‐III). n = 45. Age: 18‐45 years. Gender: 20 men and 25 women. Ethnicity: not stated. Consent: yes. History: not stated. Inclusion criteria: schizophrenia (CCMD‐3), aged 18‐45 years, ≥ 4 on the agitation item from BPRS, ≥ 4 on any 1 of the following items from BPRS: unco‐operativeness, hostility, tension, mannerisms and posturing. Exclusion criteria: serious physical illness, substance or alcohol dependence, received the study drugs 1 month prior to randomisation but with poor response.
Interventions	Combined benzodiazepines/antipsychotics vs same antipsychotics + placebo vs same benzodiazepine + placebo. 1. Clonazepam 2‐6 mg IM + haloperidol 5‐15 mg IM (n = 15). 2. Haloperidol 5‐15 mg IM + placebo (n = 15). 3. Clonazepam 2‐6 mg IM + placebo (n =15). Participants were administered scopolamine where EPS occurred.
Outcomes	Mental state: no improvement*. Mental state: mean score (total score of agitation items on BPRS, positive symptom score on BPRS). Adverse effects/events.
Notes	* decrease rate of BPRS score < 30%.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomised ‐ participants were "randomly allocated" based on random numbers.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not stated.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Double blind, not state who was blinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Follow‐up: 100%.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All measured outcomes were reported.
Other bias	Low risk	Funding: American John M Davis Funding. We did not detect any other potential bias.