Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 943

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Antipsychotic Dose Equivalents and Dose-Years: A Standardized Method for Comparing Exposure to Different Drugs

Open access
Andreasen, Nancy C., Pressler, Marcus, Nopoulos, Peg, Miller, Del, Ho, Beng-Choon·2010·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background A standardized quantitative method for comparing dosages of different drugs is a useful tool for designing clinical trials and for examining the effects of long-term medication side effects such as tardive dyskinesia. Such a method requires establishing dose equivalents. An expert consensus group has published charts of equivalent doses for various antipsychotic medications for first- and second-generation medications. These charts were used in this study. Methods Regression was used to compare each drug in the experts' charts to chlorpromazine and haloperidol and to create formulas for each relationship. The formulas were solved for chlorpromazine 100 mg and haloperidol 2 mg to derive new chlorpromazine and haloperidol equivalents. The formulas were incorporated into our definition of dose-years such that 100 mg/day of chlorpromazine equivalent or 2 mg/day of haloperidol equivalent taken for 1 year is equal to one dose-year. Results All comparisons to chlorpromazine and haloperidol were highly linear with R2 values greater than .9. A power transformation further improved linearity. Conclusions By deriving a unique formula that converts doses to chlorpromazine or haloperidol equivalents, we can compare otherwise dissimilar drugs. These equivalents can be multiplied by the time an individual has been on a given dose to derive a cumulative value measured in dose-years in the form of (chlorpromazine equivalent in mg) × (time on dose measured in years). After each dose has been converted to dose-years, the results can be summed to provide a cumulative quantitative measure of lifetime exposure.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.08.040

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 943

Metadata

Authors
Andreasen, N. C., Pressler, M., Nopoulos, P., Miller, D., & Ho, B.-C.
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-02
Volume
67
Issue
3
Pages
255-262
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060529079
Cited by
943
References
1
FWCI
18.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antipsychotic Dose Equivalents and Dose-Years: A Standardized Method for Comparing Exposure to Different Drugs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.08.040
The paper
Andreasen, N. C., Pressler, M., Nopoulos, P., Miller, D., & Ho, B.-C. (2010). Antipsychotic Dose Equivalents and Dose-Years: A Standardized Method for Comparing Exposure to Different Drugs. Biological Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.08.040

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.