Fluphenazine depot 1979a.

Study characteristics
Methods	Randomisation: no details (just reported as a "randomised study”). Allocation: procedure not described. Blinding: "double‐blind” ("patients and authors were not aware of the allocated treatment”). Duration: 9 months. Design: randomised, parallel (enriched design: patients, who responded to fluphenazine long‐acting treatment (25 mg or 50 mg/month) for at least six to 12 months before study entry, were randomised to continue that treatment or to placebo). Ten out of 20 patients had been previously recruited in a study comparing fluphenazine with trifluorazine. Location: no clear details. Setting: outpatients.
Participants	Diagnosis: chronic schizophrenia with an acute episode within 6 to 12 months before study entry (no details about diagnostic criteria). N = 20. Gender: all men. Age: 19 to 32 years. History: duration stable at least six months, duration ill‐ some were first episode patients, some were patients with recurrence, number of previous hospitalisations‐ no data, age at onset‐ no data, severity of illness‐ fluphenazine group had a mean BPRS baseline score of 24.56 (SD 3.56); placebo group had a mean BPRS baseline score of 21.71, baseline antipsychotic dose (25 mg or 50 mg/month).
Interventions	1. Drug: fluphenazine depot. Fixed dose: 25 mg or 50 mg/month (long‐acting formulation). Mean dose: n.i.. N = 10 randomised (but data available only for 9 patients who completed the study). 2. Placebo: duration of taper (days): n.i.. N = 10 randomised (but data available only for 7 patients who completed the study). Rescue medication: antiparkinson medication at study entry (and then progressively tapered off, without a prespecified schedule).
Outcomes	Examined Relapse: defined as worsening of clinical status needing an adjunctive new antipsychotic treatment. Leaving the study early. Global state: number of participants improved. Unable to use/Not included Mental state: BPRS (no prespecified outcome of interest).
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details (just reported as a "randomised study”).
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Procedure not described.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Double‐blind ("patients and authors were not aware of the allocated treatment").
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Subjective outcomes	Unclear risk	Double‐blind ("patients and authors were not aware of the allocated treatment”).
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Objective outcomes	Low risk	Double‐blind ("patients and authors were not aware of the allocated treatment”).
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	25% of the participants dropped out, all due to relapse. This may still be acceptable.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	No evidence for selective reporting.
Other bias	Low risk	No clear other bias.