ArticleSchizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
Pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: Japanese Expert Consensus 2025.
Article in Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Distinguishing Perception from Evidence in Psychiatrists' Attitudes Toward Second-Generation Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics [Letter].Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional schizophrenia treatment guidelines do not adequately address all clinically important issues in routine practice. This study aimed to update the 2021 expert consensus of the Japanese Society of Clinical Neuropsychopharmacology (JSCNP) to reflect the current clinical landscape. A total of 154 board-certified psychiatrists from the JSCNP and the Japanese Society of Neuropsychopharmacology (JSNP) evaluated treatment options across 21 clinically relevant situations using a 9-point Likert scale (1 = "strongly disagree"; 9 = "strongly agree"); the response rate was 44%. First-line antipsychotics varied by predominant symptoms: risperidone, brexpiprazole, olanzapine, paliperidone, and blonanserin for positive symptoms; aripiprazole and brexpiprazole for negative symptoms and cognitive impairment; aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, lurasidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine for depression and anxiety; brexpiprazole, aripiprazole, and olanzapine for disorganized thinking; olanzapine and risperidone for excitement and aggression; and aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, and lurasidone for social integration. Brexpiprazole, quetiapine, and aripiprazole were first-line options for patients at high risk of extrapyramidal side effects or diabetes mellitus. Dose reduction or switching was the treatment of choice for tardive dyskinesia. Repeated recurrence, patient request, and poor medication adherence were indications for introducing long-acting injectable antipsychotics. Switching to clozapine was the treatment of choice for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Adverse effects were the highest-rated factor for both dose reduction and simplification to antipsychotic monotherapy. Second-generation antipsychotics were rated as first- or second-line options in most situations, whereas first-generation antipsychotics were generally rated as third-line. These recommendations provide practical guidance for treatment selection and shared decision-making in clinically challenging situations not adequately addressed by existing evidence alone.
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.