How Efficacious Are Antipsychotic Drugs for Schizophrenia? An Interpretation Based on 13 Effect Size Indices.

BACKGROUND The magnitude of the superiority of antipsychotics over placebo is debated. One reason is that the effect-size index which is usually used in meta-analyses is in standard deviation units. Many other indices, some of which are more intuitive, exist. METHODS We explain the formulae, advantages, and limitations of 13 effect-size indices: Mean Difference (MD), Standardized-Mean-Difference (SMD), Correlation Coefficient, Ratio-of-Means (RoM, endpoint and change data), Improvement Fraction (IF), Drug-Response Fraction (DRF), Minimally-Clinically-Important-Difference-Units (MCIDU), Number-Needed-to-Treat-derived from SMD (NNT), Odds Ratio (OR), Relative Risk (RR), and Risk Difference (RD) derived from SMD, Drug-response and Placebo-response in percent. We applied these indices to meta-analyses comparing antipsychotic drugs with placebo for acute schizophrenia. RESULTS The difference of all antipsychotics pooled vs placebo (105 trials with 22741 participants) was: MD 9.4 (95% CI 8.4,10.2) PANSS points, SMD 0.47 (0.42,0.51), Correlation coefficient 0.23 (0.21,0.25), RoM endpoint 0.83 (0.81,0.85), RoM change 1.94 (1.84,2.02), IF (%) 49 (46,51), DRF (%) 94 (84,102), MCIDU 0.63 (0.56,0.68), NNT 5 (5,6), OR 2.34 (2.14, 2.52), RR 1.67 (1.59,1.73), RD 20% (18-22), and 50% (48, 52) improved on drug compared to 30% on placebo. Results of individual drugs compared to placebo are presented, as well. CONCLUSIONS Taken together these indices show a substantial, but not a large superiority of antipsychotics compared to placebo. The general chronicity of the patients in the trials must be considered. Future meta-analyses should report other effect size indices in addition to the Standardized-Mean-Difference, in particular percentage responders in the drug and placebo groups. They can be easily derived and would enhance the interpretation of research findings.

[1]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Evaluating the credibility of anchor based estimates of minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes: instrument development and reliability study , 2020, BMJ.

[2]  Andrea Cipriani,et al.  Comparative efficacy and tolerability of 32 oral antipsychotics for the acute treatment of adults with multi-episode schizophrenia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis , 2019, The Lancet.

[3]  S. Leucht,et al.  How well do patients with a first episode of schizophrenia respond to antipsychotics: A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2017, European Neuropsychopharmacology.

[4]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Do clinicians understand the size of treatment effects? A randomized survey across 8 countries , 2015, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[5]  A. Young,et al.  Does long term use of psychiatric drugs cause more harm than good? , 2015, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[6]  T. Furukawa,et al.  Which is more generalizable, powerful and interpretable in meta-analyses, mean difference or standardized mean difference? , 2014, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[7]  J. Moncrieff The Bitterest Pills , 2013 .

[8]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Combining follow-up and change data is valid in meta-analyses of continuous outcomes: a meta-epidemiological study. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[9]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Methods to convert continuous outcomes into odds ratios of treatment response and numbers needed to treat: meta-epidemiological study. , 2012, International journal of epidemiology.

[10]  Alexis Wright,et al.  Clinimetrics corner: a closer look at the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) , 2012, The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy.

[11]  John M. Davis,et al.  Putting the efficacy of psychiatric and general medicine medication into perspective: review of meta-analyses , 2012, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[12]  Kristian Thorlund,et al.  Pooling health‐related quality of life outcomes in meta‐analysis—a tutorial and review of methods for enhancing interpretability , 2011, Research synthesis methods.

[13]  T. Furukawa,et al.  How to Obtain NNT from Cohen's d: Comparison of Two Methods , 2011, PloS one.

[14]  J. Higgins,et al.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, International Coaching Psychology Review.

[15]  H. Möller,et al.  Should the PANSS be rescaled? , 2010, Schizophrenia bulletin.

[16]  John M. Davis,et al.  Defining ‘Response’ in Antipsychotic Drug Trials: Recommendations for the Use of Scale-Derived Cutoffs , 2007, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[17]  J. Kane,et al.  Linking the PANSS, BPRS, and CGI: Clinical Implications , 2006, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[18]  Stefan Leucht,et al.  What does the PANSS mean? , 2005, Schizophrenia Research.

[19]  W. Fleischhacker,et al.  Comparative efficacy of antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: A critical assessment , 2005, Schizophrenia Research.

[20]  M. Law,et al.  Headaches and the Treatment of Blood Pressure: Results From a Meta-Analysis of 94 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials With 24 000 Participants , 2005, Circulation.

[21]  S. Chinn A simple method for converting an odds ratio to effect size for use in meta-analysis. , 2000, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  T. Furukawa From effect size into number needed to treat , 1999, The Lancet.

[23]  S. Dubey,et al.  A Statistical Confidence Interval for True Per Cent Reduction in Caries-Incidence Studies , 1965, Journal of dental research.

[24]  J. Overall,et al.  The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale , 1962 .

[25]  J. Geddes,et al.  60 years of placebo-controlled antipsychotic drug trials in acute schizophrenia: systematic review, Bayesian meta-analysis and meta-regression of efficacy predictors , 2017 .

[26]  K. Hegarty,et al.  Bmc Medical Research Methodology Open Access Use of the Oxford Handicap Scale at Hospital Discharge to Predict Glasgow Outcome Scale at 6 Months in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury , 2008 .

[27]  A. Sheiham,et al.  Fluoride gels for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. , 2002, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[28]  R. Rosenthal,et al.  Meta-analysis: recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. , 2001, Annual review of psychology.

[29]  S. Kay,et al.  The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. , 1987, Schizophrenia bulletin.

[30]  R. Rosenthal Meta-analytic procedures for social research , 1984 .