ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Antipsychotic Medications in Parkinson's Disease Psychosis; A Systematic Review of Double-Blind, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Trials.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPsychosis is a common neuropsychiatric symptom associated with Parkinson's disease (PD), with prevalence rates of up to 75% over the course of the disease. Parkinson's disease psychosis (PDP) is associated with increased morbidity, caregiver burden, depression, poorer quality of life and progression of dementia. It has also been shown to be a strong predictive factor for long-term care placement, and results in up to 71% increase in risk of mortality compared with PD patients free from psychotic symptoms. Use of APs for PDP is common, with up to 35% of PD patients prescribed at least one AP within 7 years of PD diagnosis.
methodsFour electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed) were systematically searched for double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials for the use of APs in the treatment of PDP and their effects on PD motor symptoms, according to PRISMA guidelines.
resultsEleven studies from ten publications were identified and included in this review. Four studies investigated quetiapine, three investigated olanzapine, two investigated clozapine and a further two investigated pimavanserin. Quetiapine showed no significant improvement for PDP over placebo in three of the four studies, with both olanzapine studies also showing no improvement. Olanzapine studies also showed significant motor worsening compared to placebo. Clozapine significantly improved psychosis compared with placebo in both studies, with large effect sizes in primary outcome measures; (-0.82, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.26), -0.89 (95% CI -1.42 to -0.36). Pimavanserin also showed significant improvement (-0.48, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.18). Quetiapine, clozapine and pimavanserin showed no significant worsening in motor scores compared with placebo groups.
conclusionsData from the studies included in this review suggest that the use of quetiapine for the management of PDP may not be evidence based. Clozapine may improve PDP symptoms with low doses however significant side-effects may limit usability. The findings from this review support the use of clozapine as an alternative AP for the management of PDP when clinically appropriate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.