SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
A systematic review of manipulations to pharmaceutical dosage forms used in psychotropic tapering plans.
Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of manipulations to pharmaceutical dosage forms used in psychotropic tapering plans.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Benzodiazepine receptor agonist deprescribing principles for long-term use and dependence: modified Delphi recommendations from a multi-disciplinary expert panel.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- 'I Wish It Were More Often Told to People Before They Are Prescribed These Medications How Hard It Is to Get Off Them': A Qualitative Descriptive Analysis of Free-Text Responses to a Survey on Reducing and Stopping Psychiatric Medication.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo identify, evaluate and summarize all published literature that investigated manipulations to pharmaceutical dosage forms of psychotropic medications that could be used for the purposes of tapering.
methodsA systematic literature review was carried out of the available published literature on manipulations performed to psychotropic medications to obtain a decreased dose of the active pharmaceutical ingredient. All studies that involved the manipulation of pharmaceutical dosage forms of antidepressants or benzodiazepine receptor agonists and subsequent pharmaceutical analysis of active pharmaceutical ingredient content were eligible for inclusion. The electronic databases searched were: MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL.
resultsSixteen studies met inclusion criteria. The manipulation methods carried out in the identified studies involved tablet splitting (4 studies), formulation of liquid suspensions (8 studies) and diluting existing marketed liquid formulations (4 studies). Ten of the included studies reported a mean target dose recovery within the 95-105% range after the manipulation was performed. All studies in which a dilution was performed to an oral liquid formulation (n = 4) reported results within this percentage recovery range. None of the included studies investigated the accuracy of manipulations across the full dose range of a tapering schedule.
conclusionThis review identified a limited amount of published research on the accuracy of different methods of manipulating psychotropic medications. Diluting liquid formulations to achieve lower doses merits further investigation. Further research comparing different manipulation methods is also required to determine the best approach for tapering to lower doses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.