Sun 2014.

Methods	Allocation: randomised Blinding: not addressed Location: inpatient, China Length of follow‐up: 12 weeks
Participants	Diagnosis: first‐episode schizophrenia (CCMD‐3) N = 100 Sex: 49 M, 51 F Age: 20 ‐ 42 years; mean ˜ 28.8 years, SD ˜ 6.1 years Included: length of illness: 1 ‐ 6 months; mean ˜ 2.3 months, SD ˜ 1.8 months; no experience of medication treatment, able to give informed consent to proposed treatment Excluded: serious physical illness or epilepsy, substance dependence, allergy to drug, pregnancy or lactation
Interventions	1. CBT group*: N = 50 Content: CBT included the building of a therapeutic alliance with participants, functional analysis of symptoms, help to deal with hallucinations and delusions, relaxation training, personal effectiveness training and problem‐solving, as appropriate. Ziprasidone dose range 80 ‐ 160 mg/day, benzodiazepines and benzhexol can be used when necessary. Delivered by: not reported Frequency: a 40‐minute CBT was conducted weekly Treatment duration: 12 weeks 2. Standard care group: N = 50 Content: ziprasidone dose range 80 ‐ 160 mg/day, benzodiazepines and benzhexol can be used when necessary Delivered by: not reported Frequency: not reported Treatment duration: 12 weeks
Outcomes	Mental state: general (PANSS scores) Functioning: intelligence (WAIS‐R scores), memory (WMS scores) Unable to use: Functioning: executive functioning (WAIS‐R) ‐ item score rather than subscale score
Notes	*Participants in the CBT group also received the standard care intervention.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "The patients were randomly assigned..." (p.54). Comments: No details of the randomisation procedure were provided. Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'Low risk' or 'High risk'
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Comments: The author did not describe allocation concealment. Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'Low risk' or 'High risk'
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Comments: The author did not describe the blinding of participants and personnel. However, as the CBT was based on standard care, participants and personnel were not likely to be blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Comments: The author did not describe the blinding of outcome assessment. Insufficient information to permit judgement of 'Low risk' or 'High risk'
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comments: no attrition
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Comments: All measured outcomes were reported.
Other bias	Low risk	Comments: none obvious