Chen 2017.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: Randomized controlled trial Study grouping: Parallel group How were participants recruited: In this study, randomized grouping was used with admission time as the compatibility factor, and every fourth patient (as determined by time of admission) were set as an interval for randomized grouping. As a result, 38 cases of elderly patients with first‐episode schizophrenia was randomly divided into the ziprasidone treatment group (study group) and olanzapine treatment group (control group), with 19 cases in each group. Type of RCT: Single blind (patient blind) parallel controlled trial design
Participants	Baseline characteristics Ziprasidone (treatment) Sex (N, % female, % male): female 9 (47%), male 10 (53% ) Age (range and mean): 60 to 78 years, mean 68.9 years Number of participants: 19 Olanzapine (control) Sex (N, % female, % male): female 8 (42%), male 11 (58% ) Age (range and mean): 60 to 78, mean 68.2 years Number of participants: 19 Overall Sex (N, % female, % male): female 17 (45%), male 21 (55% ) Age (range and mean): 60 to 78 years, mean 68.5 years Number of participants: 38 Inclusion criteria: Age ≥ 60 years old, 2) met the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia according to the ICD‐10 classification of mental and behavioral disorders,with a PANSS total score≥60 points, 3) no issues taking ziprasidone or olanzapine, and 4) informed consent was provided by patients’ legal guardians Exclusion criteria: 1) having diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidaemia, or severe liver and renal insufficiency, 2) presence of organic neurological disease such as epilepsy, intracranial infection, brain tumour as determined by MRI or EEG examination, 3) presence of systemic diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and schizophrenia‐like behavior caused by drug intoxication Pretreatment: No significant statistical difference between two groups
Interventions	Intervention characteristics Ziprasidone (treatment) Class of drug: Ziprasidone Hydrochloride Capsules (20mg per capsule, Jiangsu Nhwa Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.), Dose: with an initial dose of 40mg/day (dose ranging from 40 to 120mg/day, and a mean (SD) dose of 92.4 (4.5) mg/day). Frequency: Daily Duration: 12weeks Who delivered the intervention? The authors (Jing Chen, Xingen Pan, Mincai Qian, and Shoukai Yang) were responsible for the management and treatment of patients. The first author is an attending doctor of the hospital where the study took place. Type of intervention: Pharmacological Olanzapine (control) Class of drug: Olanzapine tablets (5mg/tablet, Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group. Co. Ltd.,), Dose: With an initial dose of 5mg/day (dose ranging 5 to 20mg/day and a mean (SD) of 9.5 (4.3)mg/day). Frequency: Daily Duration: 12 weeks Who delivered the intervention? The authors (Jing Chen, Xingen Pan, Mincai Qian, and Shoukai Yang) were responsible for the management and treatment of patients. The first author is an attending doctor of the hospital where the study took place. Type of intervention: Pharmacological
Outcomes	Fasting blood sugar Outcome type: Continuous Unit of measure: mmol/L Direction: Lower is better Data value: Endpoint Cholesterol Outcome type: Continuous Unit of measure: mmol/L Direction: Lower is better Data value: Endpoint
Identification	Sponsorship source: Zhejiang Province Huzhou 3rd People’s Hospital Public Welfare Application Research project (project # 2016GYB03) Country: China Setting: The Third People’s Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou, Zhejiang Province, China Comments: ‐ Authors name: Jing Chen, Xingen Pan, Mincai Qian, and Shoukai Yang Institution: Department of Geriatric Psychiatry, The Third People’s Hospital of Huzhou Email: E‐Mail: 781703956@qq.com Address: Department of Geriatric Psychiatry, The Third People’s Hospital of Huzhou, Huzhou,Zhejiang Province, China. Postcode: 313000.
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Randomized grouping was used with admission time as the compatibility factor, and every fourth patient (as determined by time of admission) were set as an interval for randomized grouping".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Paper did not mention who randomized the patients into two groups and how the allocation was determined.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Single blind (patient blind) parallel controlled trial design was used". Participants were blinded but insufficient information to determine how blinding was tested, guaranteed or maintained.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The paper did not mention who participated in the outcome measurement.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Authors report no drop‐out; data available for all participants.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No reference to protocol.
Other sources of bias	Low risk	No further sources of bias identified.