“…Four of them were double‐blind randomized controlled studies and were rated as high‐quality studies (Meyers et al ., ; Mulsant et al ., ; Meyers et al ., ;Flint et al ., ), whereas 19 were open prospective controlled ones and were rated as medium‐quality studies (Kivela and Pahkala, ; Meyers et al ., ; Baldwin, ; Zubenko et al ., ; O'Brien et al ., ; Flint and Rifat, , ; Kim et al ., ; Simpson et al ., ; Meyers et al ., ; Gournellis et al ., ; Ohayon and Schatzberg, ; Lykouras et al ., ; Lee et al ., ; Parker et al ., ; Kessing, ; Kok et al ., ; Flint et al ., ; Gournellis et al ., ). Twelve were rated as low‐quality studies—always in regard to our research questions—because four were retrospective (Baldwin and Jolley, ; Meyers and Greenberg, ; Baldwin, ; Nelson et al ., ), three had a small number of PMD patients (Kunik et al ., , eight patients; Grierz et al ., , 10 patients; Politis et al ., , 11 patients), two (Murphy, ; Burvuil et al ., ) did not directly compare PMD and non‐PMD patients, one (Gournellis et al ., ) lacked a control group, one (Meyers et al ., ) did not compare older and younger PMD patients and one (Navaro et al ., ) had doubtful relevance to our research questions (Table ).…”