The letter by Van Putten and colleagues has raised several in teresting questions. It also presents some interpretations of our data that were not stated, intended, or implied in our article.1 Before responding specifically to these questions, we wish to make corrections to our article that are warranted following our review of the procedures and data base.First, there were several errors in the data entered into the computer data base utilized in the final statistical analysis. Subject 24 (Table 1 of the original article)2 had been dropped from the protocol because of a violation of protocol procedures. He was erroneously confused with another subject with a similar name and his data were mistakenly retained in the data base.The mean plasma haloperidol levels of two other subjects (subjects 3 and 25) also were incorrectly computed. Subject 3 should have a haloperidol plasma level of 18.5 ng/mL (not
Smith RC. Plasma Haloperidol Levels: Clinical Response and Fancy Mathematics-Reply. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1985;42(8):835–838. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790310103015
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.