Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24242360›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

Haloperidol versus placebo for schizophrenia.

Clive E Adams, Hanna Bergman, Claire B Irving, Stephen Lawrie

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 16 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 156 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Meta-analysis using Python: a hands-on tutorial.BMC medical research methodology · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Haloperidol discontinuation for people with schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Chlorpromazine dose for people with schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  7. Industry sponsorship and research outcome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  8. Risperidone versus placebo for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  9. Haloperidol for long-term aggression in psychosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  10. Haloperidol plus promethazine for psychosis-induced aggression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  11. Bifeprunox versus placebo for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  12. Asenapine versus placebo for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Haloperidol versus placebo for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  16. Antipsychotic medication for early episode schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Clive E AdamsCochrane Schizophrenia Group, The University of Nottingham, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham Innovation Park, Triumph Road,, Nottingham, UK, NG7 2TU.
Hanna Bergman
Claire B Irving
Stephen Lawrie
Cochrane · GBKleijnen Systematic Reviews (United Kingdom) · GBRoyal Edinburgh Hospital · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/4001/15
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHaloperidol was developed in the late 1950s for use in the field of anaesthesia. Research subsequently demonstrated effects on hallucinations, delusions, aggressiveness, impulsiveness and states of excitement and led to the introduction of haloperidol as an antipsychotic.

objectivesTo evaluate the clinical effects of haloperidol for the management of schizophrenia and other similar serious mental illnesses compared with placebo. SEARCH

methodsInitially, we electronically searched the databases of Biological Abstracts (1985-1998), CINAHL (1982-1998), The Cochrane Library (1998, Issue 4), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (December 1998), EMBASE (1980-1998), MEDLINE (1966-1998), PsycLIT (1974-1998), and SCISEARCH. We also checked references of all identified studies for further trial citations and contacted the authors of trials and pharmaceutical companies for further information and archive material.For the 2012 update, on 15 May 2012, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all relevant randomised controlled trials comparing the use of haloperidol (any oral dose) with placebo for those with schizophrenia or other similar serious, non-affective psychotic illnesses (however diagnosed). Our main outcomes of interest were death, loss to follow-up, clinical and social response, relapse and severity of adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We evaluated data independently and extracted, re-inspected and quality assessed the data. We analysed dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and calculated their 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We excluded continuous data if loss to follow-up was greater than 50% and inspected data for heterogeneity. We used a fixed-effect model for all analyses. For the 2012 update, we assessed risk of bias of included studies and used the GRADE approach to create a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN

resultsTwenty-five trials randomising 4651 people are now included in this review. We chose seven main outcomes of interest for the 'Summary of findings' table. More people allocated haloperidol improved in the first six weeks of treatment than those given placebo (4 RCTs n = 472, RR 0.67 CI 0.56 to 0.80, moderate quality evidence). A further eight trials also found a difference favouring haloperidol across the six weeks to six months period (8 RCTs n = 307 RR 0.67 CI 0.58 to 0.78, moderate quality evidence). Relapse data from two trials favoured haloperidol at < 52 weeks but the evidence was very low quality (2 RCTs n = 70, RR 0.69 CI 0.55 to 0.86). Moderate quality evidence showed about half of those entering studies failed to complete the short trials (six weeks to six months), although, at up to six weeks, 16 studies found a difference that marginally favoured haloperidol (n = 1812, RR 0.87 CI 0.80 to 0.95). Adverse effect data does, nevertheless, support clinical impression that haloperidol is a potent cause of movement disorders, at least in the short term. Moderate quality evidence indicates that haloperidol caused parkinsonism (5 RCTs n = 485, RR 5.48 CI 2.68 to 11.22), akathisia (6 RCTs n = 695, RR 3.66 CI 2.24 to 5.97, and acute dystonia (5 RCTs n = 471, RR 11.49 CI 3.23 to 10.85). Discharge from hospital was equivocal between groups (1 RCT n = 33, RR 0.85 CI 0.47 to 1.52, very low quality evidence). Data were not reported for death and patient satisfaction. AUTHORS'

conclusionsHaloperidol is a potent antipsychotic drug but has a high propensity to cause adverse effects. Where there is no treatment option, use of haloperidol to counter the damaging and potentially dangerous consequences of untreated schizophrenia is justified. However, where a choice of drug is available, people with schizophrenia and clinicians may wish to prescribe an alternative antipsychotic with less likelihood of adverse effects such as parkinsonism, akathisia and acute dystonias. Haloperidol should be less favoured as a control drug for randomised trials of new antipsychotics.

Indexed as

Akathisia, Drug-InducedAntipsychotic AgentsDystoniaHaloperidolHumansParkinsonian DisordersPlacebo EffectRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSchizophreniaTreatment OutcomeAntipsychotic AgentsHaloperidol

Identifiers

PMID24242360
PMCPMC11558230
OpenAlexW2111035166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.