***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: No new trials were included from the 2012 search. The review still includes two trials of short duration comparing sulpiride with placebo (total n = 113). No study reported our primary outcome of interest of 'global state: clinically significant response', nor our secondary outcomes of interest of 'quality of life', 'severe adverse effects', and 'safety assessments'. As regards mental state, there were no clear differences between groups for either positive or negative symptoms; measured positive symptoms using the Manchester scale were skewed and therefore not included in meta-analysis (n = 18, 1 RCT, very low quality evidence). Measured negative symptoms using the Manchester scale also demonstrated no clear difference (n = 18, 1 RCT, MD -3.0 CI -1.66 to 1.06, very low quality evidence). Few people left these studies by three months (n = 113, 2 RCTs, RR 1.00 CI 0.25 to 4.00). One subscore finding demonstrated a significant improvement in social behaviour using the Current Behaviour Schedule (CBS) when receiving placebo (n = 18, 1 RCT, MD -2.90 CI -5.60 to -0.20). There were no data for many important outcomes such as global outcomes, service use or adverse effects. Sulpiride may be an effective antipsychotic drug but evidence of its superiority over placebo from randomised trials is very limited. Practice will have to use evidence from sources other than trials until better evidence is generated.
Output:

The aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of sulpiride for schizophrenia compared to placebo (‘dummy’ treatment). Two short-term (12 weeks) studies with a total of 113 people are included. Information was limited and poorly reported. The inclusion of two small studies with small sample sizes meant that resulting data were not overly robust or meaningful. Overall no clear difference was noted between those receiving sulpiride and those receiving placebo for mental state or for leaving the study early. There was no information on other important outcomes, including: general functioning, service use, hospital admission, employment, family burden, satisfaction with care and side effects. The use of sulpiride seems to be based on clinical experience rather than strong evidence. Its widespread use in developing countries might have more to do with its lower cost than its effectiveness. Longer, well-planned, better conducted and reported randomised control trials would contribute to our knowledge about the effectiveness and potential side effects of this drug. This plain language summary has been written by a consumer Benjamin Gray: Service User and Service User Expert: Rethink Mental Illness. Email: [email protected]