Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. How common it is

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an advisory stating that atypical antipsychotic medications increase mortality among elderly patients. However, the advisory did not apply to conventional antipsychotic medications; the risk of death with these older agents is not known. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 22,890 patients 65 years of age or older who had drug insurance benefits in Pennsylvania and who began receiving a conventional or atypical antipsychotic medication between 1994 and 2003. Analyses of mortality rates and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to compare the risk of death within 180 days, less than 40 days, 40 to 79 days, and 80 to 180 days after the initiation of therapy with an antipsychotic medication. We controlled for potential confounding variables with the use of traditional multivariate Cox models, propensity-score adjustments, and an instrumental-variable analysis. Results Conventional antipsychotic medications were associated with a significantly higher adjusted risk of death than were atypical antipsychotic medications at all intervals studied ( Conclusions If confirmed, these results suggest that conventional antipsychotic medications are at least as likely as atypical agents to increase the risk of death among elderly persons and that conventional drugs should not be used to replace atypical agents discontinued in response to the FDA warning.

Key findings

Why it matters

In this study of elderly patients, conventional antipsychotic medications were linked to a higher risk of death than atypical antipsychotics. The authors state that if confirmed, conventional drugs should not be used to replace atypical agents in elderly patients.

Study details

How this study scored 72/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 10 of 10; Journal's citation record 4 of 4; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 4 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 4 of 5; Impact for its field and year 6 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 3 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 72 of 100.72 of 100 points earned28 not earned

Published in a top-tier journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 10 / 10 Tier 1 — top-tier general journal (The New England journal of medicine)
Journal's citation record 4 / 4 New England Journal of Medicine: journal h-index 1,505 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 7 / 12 A cohort study following people over time
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2005 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 4 / 4 22,890 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 959 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 4 / 5 41.7 citations a year over 23 year(s) since 2005
Impact for its field and year 6 / 6 Cited 42.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 21 other studies in this library
Still being cited 2 / 4 Cited 48 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author M. Alan Brookhart: h-index 52 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 3 / 3 Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16319382)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 72 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Wang, P. S., Schneeweiss, S., Avorn, J., Fischer, M. A., Mogun, H., Solomon, D. H., et al. (2005). Risk of death in elderly users of conventional vs. atypical antipsychotic medications. The New England journal of medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa052827

Vancouver

Wang PS, Schneeweiss S, Avorn J, Fischer MA, Mogun H, Solomon DH, et al. Risk of death in elderly users of conventional vs. atypical antipsychotic medications. The New England journal of medicine. 2005. doi:10.1056/nejmoa052827. PMID: 16319382.

BibTeX

@article{wang2005-16319382,
  author  = {Wang, P. S. and Schneeweiss, S. and Avorn, J. and Fischer, M. A. and Mogun, H. and Solomon, D. H. and Brookhart, M. A.},
  title   = {{Risk of death in elderly users of conventional vs. atypical antipsychotic medications}},
  journal = {The New England journal of medicine},
  year    = {2005},
  doi     = {10.1056/nejmoa052827},
  pmid    = {16319382},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa052827}
}

Later studies that cite this one

21 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in How common it is

Also tagged “delirium”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on How common it is

See all studies in How common it is →