This systematic review aims to identify and collate studies describing the prevalence of schizophrenia, summarize the findings, and explore factors influencing prevalence estimates. The review identified 1,721 prevalence estimates from 188 studies across 46 countries, based on an estimated 154,140 potentially overlapping cases. The median prevalence rates were 4.6 per 1,000 for point prevalence, 3.3 for period prevalence, 4.0 for lifetime prevalence, and 7.2 for lifetime morbid risk. Key findings include: 1. **Sex Differences**: No significant difference in prevalence between males and females. 2. **Urbanicity**: Higher prevalence in urban areas compared to rural and mixed urban/rural sites. 3. **Migrant Status**: Higher prevalence in migrants compared to native-born individuals. 4. **Economic Status**: Lower prevalence in least developed countries compared to emerging and developed countries. 5. **Study Quality**: Higher quality studies reported significantly higher prevalence estimates. The review highlights the variability in prevalence estimates and suggests that future research should focus on understanding the factors influencing these gradients. The findings also emphasize the importance of systematic data collection and the need for more research in developing countries.This systematic review aims to identify and collate studies describing the prevalence of schizophrenia, summarize the findings, and explore factors influencing prevalence estimates. The review identified 1,721 prevalence estimates from 188 studies across 46 countries, based on an estimated 154,140 potentially overlapping cases. The median prevalence rates were 4.6 per 1,000 for point prevalence, 3.3 for period prevalence, 4.0 for lifetime prevalence, and 7.2 for lifetime morbid risk. Key findings include: 1. **Sex Differences**: No significant difference in prevalence between males and females. 2. **Urbanicity**: Higher prevalence in urban areas compared to rural and mixed urban/rural sites. 3. **Migrant Status**: Higher prevalence in migrants compared to native-born individuals. 4. **Economic Status**: Lower prevalence in least developed countries compared to emerging and developed countries. 5. **Study Quality**: Higher quality studies reported significantly higher prevalence estimates. The review highlights the variability in prevalence estimates and suggests that future research should focus on understanding the factors influencing these gradients. The findings also emphasize the importance of systematic data collection and the need for more research in developing countries.