Zotepine in the treatment of schizophrenic patients with prevailingly negative symptoms. A double-blind trial vs. haloperidol

Barnas, C.; Ch, Stuppäck; Miller, Collin; Haring, C.; Sperner‐Unterweger, Barbara; Fleischhacker, W.W.

doi:10.1097/00004850-199200710-00003

Cited by 83 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The original review was of ten RCTs: Barnas 1987, 297 Cooper 1999a, 298 Cooper 1999b, 299 Dieterle 1991, 300 Fleischhacker 1989, 301 Klieser 1996, 302 Meyer-Lindberg 1996, 108 Petit 1996, 303 Sarai 1987, 304 Wetzel 1999. 305 Data extraction sheets for these trials can be found in appendix 3.…”

Section: Old Rctsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most participants in the included studies were in hospital, including all those in the Barnas 1987 297 and Petit 1996 303 trials. Small proportions of those in the other studies were attending outpatient departments.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adequate precautions for blinding of treatment were clearly described in eight trials (Barnas 1987, 297 Cooper 1999a, 298 Cooper 1999b, 299 Dieterle 1991, 300 Fleischhacker 1989, 301 Petit 1996, 303 Sarai 1987, 304 Wetzel 1991 405 ). None of the included trials tested the adequacy of the blindness of those rating outcomes.…”

Section: Quality Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Barnas 1987, 297 the result for CGI scores that did not reach significance were dichotomised (RR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.11 to 2.33; risk difference, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.15). The outcome of needing to prescribe additional antipsychotic medication was also reported in Dieterle 1991, 300 Sarai 1987 304 and Wetzel 1991.…”

Section: Global Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the outcome 'no important clinical responses by 4-12 weeks', a cut-off point on the overall BPRS change score that was considered to be clinically important was pre-specified in four trials (Barnas 1987, 297 Cooper 1999a, 298 Petit 1996, 303 Sarai 1987 304 ). On summation, statistical significance was found in favour of zotepine (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.92; risk difference, -0.15; 95% CI, -0.24 to -0.05).…”

Section: Mental Statementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of atypical antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia

Bagnall

Jones

Ginnelly

et al. 2003

Health Technol Assess

151

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. Contact Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to Direct Mail Works Ltd and drawn on a bank with a UK address. Paying by credit cardThe following cards are accepted by phone, fax, post or via the website ordering pages: Delta, Eurocard, Mastercard, Solo, Switch and Visa. We advise against sending credit card details in a plain email. Paying by official purchase orderYou can post or fax these, but they must be from public bodies (i.e. NHS or universities) within the UK. We cannot at present accept purchase orders from commercial companies or from outside the UK. How do I get a copy of HTA on CD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd.htm). Or contact Direct Mail Works (see contact details above) by email, post, fax or phone. HTA on CD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA Programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTAA systematic review of atypical antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia NHS R&D HTA ProgrammeT he NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme was set up in 1993 to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.The research reported in this monograph was commissioned by the HTA Programme on behalf of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Technology assessment reports are completed in a limited time to inform the appraisal and guidance development processes managed by NICE. The review brings together evidence on key aspects of the use of the technology concerned. However, appraisals and guidance produced by NICE are informed by a wide range of sources.The research reported in this monograph was funded as project number 00/20/01.The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the HTA Programme, NICE or the Department of Health. The editors wish to emphasise that funding and publication of this research by the NHS should not be taken as implicit support for any recommendations made by the authors. Criteria for inclusion in the HTA monograph seriesReports are published in the HTA monograph series if (1) they have resulted from work commissioned for the HTA Programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the referees and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'syst...

show abstract