Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31158853›Full record

SynthesisJAMA psychiatry2019

Evaluation of Differences in Individual Treatment Response in Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: A Meta-analysis.

Stephanie Winkelbeiner, Stefan Leucht, John M Kane, Philipp Homan

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 12 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Placebo response variability on health-related quality of life outcomes in irritable bowel syndrome: an arm-based network meta-analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Stephanie WinkelbeinerCenter for Psychiatric Neuroscience, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York.
Stefan LeuchtDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
John M KaneCenter for Psychiatric Neuroscience, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York.
Philipp HomanCenter for Psychiatric Neuroscience, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York.
Northwell Health · USTechnical University of Munich · DEUniversity of Bern · CHZucker Hillside Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: An assumption among clinicians and researchers is that patients with schizophrenia vary considerably in their response to antipsychotic drugs in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Objective: To evaluate the overall variation in individual treatment response from random variation by comparing the variability between treatment and control groups. Data Sources: Cochrane Schizophrenia, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, BIOSIS Previews, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from January 1, 1955, to December 31, 2016. Study Selection: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, RCTs of adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders and prescription for licensed antipsychotic drugs. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Means and SDs of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale pretreatment and posttreatment outcome difference scores were extracted. Data quality and validity were ensured by following the PRISMA guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome measure was the overall variability ratio of treatment to control in a meta-analysis across RCTs. Individual variability ratios were weighted by the inverse-variance method and entered into a random-effects model. A personal element of response was hypothesized to be reflected by a substantial overall increase in variability in the treatment group compared with the control group. Results: An RCT was simulated, comprising 30 patients with schizophrenia randomized to either the treatment or the control group. The different components of variation in RCTs were illustrated with simulated data. In addition, we assessed the variability ratio in 52 RCTs involving 15 360 patients with a schizophrenia or schizoaffective diagnosis. The variability was slightly lower in the treatment compared with the control group (variability ratio = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, no evidence was found in RCTs that antipsychotic drugs increased the outcome variance, suggesting no personal element of response to treatment but instead indicating that the variance was slightly lower in the treatment group than in the control group; although the study cannot rule out that subsets of patients respond differently to treatment, it suggests that the average treatment effect is a reasonable assumption for the individual patient.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentAntipsychotic AgentsHumansPsychotic DisordersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSchizophreniaAntipsychotic Agents

Identifiers

PMID31158853
PMCPMC6547253
OpenAlexW2948592229

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.