Steroid Equivalency Calculator
The formula
What the steroid equivalency tells you
The anti-inflammatory equivalency table (hydrocortisone 20 : prednisone 5 : methylpred 4 : dex 0.75) used for every steroid switch and taper audit.
Calculation: Equivalents: HC 20 = pred 5 = MP 4 = dex 0.75. Enter your inputs and every substitution is shown below the result.
Reading the result
Mineralocorticoid potency does NOT follow the table — dexamethasone has none, hydrocortisone plenty; switching for salt effects is a different decision.
Rules of thumb: Physiologic replacement ≈ 5–7.5 mg prednisone equivalent
Limitations and best practice
Biologic half-lives differ hugely (dex 36–54 h) — equivalence of dose is not equivalence of HPA suppression.
This calculator gives an estimate based on standard formulas; it is not professional financial, medical, legal or engineering advice. Verify anything you plan to act on with a qualified professional and your own records.
Frequently asked questions
Is IV = oral?
Pulse steroids?
Source & methodology
Slater endocrinology equivalence tables.
How Steroid Equivalency works — and what your result really means
Capital decisions deserve better than a gut feeling — this page gives you the arithmetic to defend one. There are plenty of pages about Steroid Equivalency; almost none of them show the working. This one does: the formula, every input, a fully computed example, and a sensitivity analysis calculated live from this engine’s own defaults.
Trends beat snapshots. Steroid Equivalency measured once tells you where you stand today; measured monthly against Current steroid tells you which way the needle is moving — and direction is the actionable information in Medications & Dosing.
What makes Steroid Equivalency worth calculating is not precision but position: it tells you which side of a threshold you are on, and by how much. A rough figure that settles the direction beats an elaborate one that never commits.
Nothing below is stock text pasted around a number: the worked example computes equivalent dose = 3.30 mg from this tool’s own defaults, and the sensitivity section ranks the inputs that move the result — Daily dose first, at ≈10.0 % of the headline for a ten-percent error either way in that input — which is the thread the rest of this guide pulls on.
Every input in Steroid Equivalency, and what it does to the answer
Here is the complete model this tool runs — Equivalents: HC 20 = pred 5 = MP 4 = dex 0.75 — with each input explained below. If a competitor’s page gives you a different answer from the same inputs, this is the text that settles which of you is right.
Current steroid (example value Prednisone) is a branching choice rather than a figure you measure; the per-option effects are computed below. If you are unsure what belongs in this field, look at the printed steps: the substitution shows exactly how the engine uses it.
Daily dose (mg) (example value 22) is a measured number in the unit named by the label; the formula does not convert for you. Double-check that the unit on your source matches the unit this field expects before typing.
Target steroid (mg equiv of) (example value to Dexamethasone) is a selector, not a measurement: the engine follows a different route for each option. Take this figure from a label, a report or a prescription — never from a guess.
What each “Current steroid” choice actually does: Hydrocortisone → 0.82 mg · Prednisone → 3.30 mg · Prednisolone → 3.30 mg · Methylprednisolone → 4.13 mg · Dexamethasone → 22.00 mg — each value above is the model’s own output for that option, so the choice can be made on evidence rather than on what a category feels like it means.
What each “Target steroid (mg equiv of)” choice actually does: to Hydrocortisone → 88.00 mg · to Prednisone → 22.00 mg · to Dexamethasone → 3.30 mg — each value above is the model’s own output for that option, so the choice can be made on evidence rather than on what a category feels like it means.
Steroid Equivalency on the example inputs: the complete substitution
Abstract formulas are hard to trust, so here is the complete substitution using the default inputs, written the way an examiner would want it. Starting figures: Current steroid, Daily dose (mg), Target steroid (mg equiv of). The computed equivalent dose comes out at 3.30 mg, which the interpretation band labels “22 mg of this steroid equals 3.30 mg dexamethasone — i.e. 3.30 mg of the target; that is supraphysiologic: taper plan and bone/glucose protection belong on the chart”.
- Reference point: 5.00 mg of source = 0.75 mg dex
- Dex-equivalent = 22 × 0.75 ÷ 5.00 = 3.30
- Target = dex × 0.75 ÷ 0.75 = 3.30 mg
In dex units — 3.30 mg. If your inputs change, this is usually the first companion figure to move.
In pred units — 22.00 mg. If your inputs change, this is usually the first companion figure to move.
Supraphysiologic? — YES (>7.5 mg pred/d). This is the number experienced users quote when the headline alone would mislead.
Night suppression — single morning dose preferred. This is the number experienced users quote when the headline alone would mislead.
Keep this worked example open while you enter your own figures: matching the shape of the substitution is the fastest way to spot a unit or convention mistake.
How far Steroid Equivalency can reasonably move
The honest version of any estimate is a corridor, and this one is cheap to produce: Steroid Equivalency was recomputed at 5 points along the dominant input, with every other field left untouched.
| Daily dose setting | Equivalent dose |
|---|---|
| 80 % of the example value | 2.64 mg |
| 90 % of the example value | 2.97 mg |
| example inputs | 3.30 mg |
| 110 % of the example value | 3.63 mg |
| 120 % of the example value | 3.96 mg |
That spread — 2.64 mg at the low end, 3.96 mg at the high — is what a careful read of Steroid Equivalency looks like: a band you can state out loud, with the reason for each edge. Reproduce it in the form above by editing Daily dose alone; the substitution steps will follow your figures exactly.
What actually moves your Steroid Equivalency
Generic advice says “it depends on your inputs”; this section says exactly how much. Each field was perturbed by ±10 % in isolation and the equivalent dose recomputed, so the ranking below is measured rather than asserted. For Steroid Equivalency the ranking is measured rather than guessed, and it belongs to these defaults: shift the starting point and the order can shift with it.
- Nudge Daily dose by ±10 % and Steroid Equivalency lands between 2.97 mg and 3.63 mg (sensitivity ≈10.0 %)
Daily dose is the dominant lever here: ten percent either way moves the result by about 10.0 %, from 2.97 mg to 3.63 mg. Measure that input from a document rather than from memory. The remaining fields can sit at safe defaults without materially changing the answer — knowing which is which is what separates a careful calculation from an anxious one.
What a Steroid Equivalency of 3.30 mg means in practice
Nobody acts on a bare figure — they act on a figure with a comparison attached. On the example inputs the band reads “22 mg of this steroid equals 3.30 mg dexamethasone — i.e. 3.30 mg of the target; that is supraphysiologic: taper plan and bone/glucose protection belong on the chart”; your own figures place you on a different rung of the same ladder. The sensitivity list shows how far a modest input error moves you along that ladder: for Daily dose, ±10 % covers 2.97 mg to 3.63 mg. The practical reading rules: ask what would have to change to move you one band. If the answer is “a small, plausible input difference”, the band itself is not the finding — the uncertainty is.
Placing this figure in context: calculators of this kind differ less in arithmetic than in what they choose to ignore. This one keeps Current steroid explicit so that the omissions are visible rather than hidden in a preset.
How people get Steroid Equivalency wrong
Biologic half-lives differ hugely (dex 36–54 h) — equivalence of dose is not equivalence of HPA suppression. This calculator gives an estimate based on standard formulas; it is not professional financial, medical, legal or engineering advice. Verify anything you plan to act on with a qualified professional and your own records.
Copying a single headline number without checking the companion outputs. The tool reports In dex units, In pred units and Supraphysiologic? alongside the main result precisely because Steroid Equivalency in isolation misleads — the secondary columns are where outliers and trade-offs show up.
One mistake is specific to this engine: assuming every input matters equally. The computation above shows Daily dose dominating — a careful figure there beats false precision everywhere else.
The subtlest error is answering the wrong question precisely. Confirm that equivalent dose is actually the quantity your decision needs — the arithmetic is flawless either way, which is what makes the mistake invisible.
A quick check for any Steroid Equivalency figure
- Note the date and the inputs beside the number so the figure can be audited later.
- Verify each input against its original source document, not memory.
- Re-verify Daily dose against a source document — ten percent of error there moves the headline by ≈10.0 %.
- Compare the result with one independent method or published benchmark.
- Check that every field the formula needs actually arrived from a document, not from recollection.
- Run the ±10 % stress on the top two levers and check that your conclusion survives both.
A routine for decision-grade Steroid Equivalency
The tool does the arithmetic; the routine below is what makes the arithmetic trustworthy. Five steps, a minute total — and afterwards you will know not just what the number is, but which assumption produced it.
Step 1 — start from evidence. The inputs behind Steroid Equivalency are current steroid, daily dose (mg), target steroid (mg equiv of). Write them down with their source next to each one; if you cannot name where a figure came from, that is the input most likely to be wrong. Rounding early is the quietest way to introduce a permanent error.
Step 2 — enter the conservative case first. Resist the flattering scenario. Type the inputs you would defend in front of a sceptical reader, read the Equivalent dose (3.30 mg for the example values), and note the verdict band. Half of a good calculation is knowing which input you would hate to be wrong about.
Step 3 — play with the inputs on purpose. Ten percent up, ten percent down, one field at a time. Within a few minutes you will know this calculation better than most people who quote its results. A calculation you cannot explain to somebody else is a calculation you cannot defend.
Step 4 — run the scenario trio. Expected, pessimistic, optimistic. The gap between pessimistic and expected is the number to plan against; the optimistic result is useful only as a ceiling. Say the answer out loud before you save it; if it sounds wrong, the model did not change, your understanding did.
Step 5 — write the one-line memo. “Equivalent dose = 3.30 mg on this date, from these inputs.” That line is the entire deliverable; everything else on this page is how you earned the right to write it. Write the figure down before moving on; memory flatters whichever number you saw last.
Where Steroid Equivalency matters in practice
In Medications & Dosing the figure computed here is usually the first one somebody asks to see. Having it — with the formula behind it — changes your position in the conversation from participant to reference. When two sources disagree, it is almost never the arithmetic that differs.
Professionals in Medications & Dosing use this style of calculation as a screening filter before spending real money or effort: a quick Steroid Equivalency check eliminates weak options in minutes, and the survivors earn the deeper, slower analysis. Numbers are cheap to produce and expensive to retract; the extra minute is the cheapest insurance available.
There is a personal-administration use people overlook: periodic self-checking. Steroid Equivalency quietly drifts as life changes — rates move, bodies change, costs compound — and re-running it a few times a year catches drift while correction is still cheap. The input you reach for first is usually the one you measured longest ago.
Quick answers: what searchers ask about Steroid Equivalency
What affects Steroid Equivalency the most?
The short answer: Daily dose. The longer answer is the sensitivity table on this page, where every numeric input was probed by ten percent and the equivalent dose recalculated — Daily dose moved it furthest, by roughly 10.0 % (2.97 mg to 3.63 mg).
How much does the “Current steroid” choice change the answer?
Across every option this tool offers, the equivalent dose ranges from 0.82 mg (Hydrocortisone) to 22.00 mg (Dexamethasone) with all other inputs held at their example values. The per-option table is printed in the inputs section — this is a decision that genuinely moves the number, not a cosmetic dropdown.
What is a typical Steroid Equivalency?
With the example inputs on this page the result is 3.30 mg, labelled “22 mg of this steroid equals 3.30 mg dexamethasone — i.e. 3.30 mg of the target; that is supraphysiologic: taper plan and bone/glucose protection belong on the chart”. “Typical” varies with situation, which is why every result here ships with its verdict band and its sensitivity list: they turn one figure into a range you can locate yourself inside.
How do I calculate Steroid Equivalency by hand?
Use the stated model — Equivalents: HC 20 = pred 5 = MP 4 = dex 0.75 — and substitute in the order the tool prints (it starts from Reference point: 5.00 mg of source = 0.75 mg dex). On the example inputs the hand route lands on 3.30 mg, exactly what the calculator shows. A spreadsheet reproduces it in two or three cells; doing it once by hand is what makes the automated answer trustworthy.
What happens to Steroid Equivalency if daily dose changes by 10 %?
On these inputs a ±10 % change in daily dose takes Steroid Equivalency to 3.63 mg against the 3.30 mg example — around 10.0 % of the headline. The same test on every other field is in the sensitivity section.
Is the Steroid Equivalency result of 3.30 mg good or bad?
Good and bad are comparisons, so the honest test is three questions: where does your own Steroid Equivalency sit against the 3.30 mg reference above, how far would a plausible input error move it (≈10.0 % per ten percent on Daily dose), and what does the alternative option compute to?
How often should I check Steroid Equivalency?
Whenever an input changes by more than a few percent, and otherwise on the rhythm of your decisions — before a purchase, a review, a renewal. Steroid Equivalency is a snapshot, not a subscription; stale snapshots are the most common silent error in Health & Medical planning.
How do I calculate Steroid Equivalency manually?
Write down the inputs, then follow the printed steps in order — Equivalents: HC 20 = pred 5 = MP 4 = dex 0.75. A spreadsheet replicates it with two or three cells. The manual route is worth doing once to build intuition; after that the calculator saves time and eliminates transcription slips.
Is IV = oral?
For these agents yes: the equivalences are the same whether the needle or the cup (methylpred succinate noted separately).
Pulse steroids?
Pulse methylprednisolone dosing is pharmacologic, not equivalency arithmetic — different framework.
Do I need an account to use this Steroid Equivalency calculator?
No, and no data leaves the tab. The engine runs in the page itself, which is why the worked example, the bands and the sensitivity ranking all respond instantly to your keystrokes.
The vocabulary of Steroid Equivalency
- In dex units
- 3.30 mg in the default Steroid Equivalency calculation — one of the secondary figures an experienced reader checks before trusting the primary number.
- In pred units
- 22.00 mg for the Steroid Equivalency worked case; it sits next to the main result because it carries context the headline leaves out.
- Supraphysiologic?
- YES (>7.5 mg pred/d) in the default Steroid Equivalency calculation — one of the secondary figures an experienced reader checks before trusting the primary number.
- Equivalent dose
- The primary output of this tool: 3.30 mg for the default inputs, computed exactly from Equivalents: HC 20 = pred 5 = MP 4 = dex 0.75.
- Worked example
- Every substitution in order, from the example inputs to 3.30 mg — the audit trail for the headline figure.
- Verdict band
- A named zone on the range of plausible results; the example inputs land in “22 mg of this steroid equals 3.30 mg dexamethasone — i.e. 3.30 mg of the target; that is supraphysiologic: taper plan and bone/glucose protection belong on the chart”, and your inputs may not.
- Sensitivity (±10 %)
- How far the Steroid Equivalency moves when a single input is nudged ten percent either way; the ranked list on this page is computed live from this engine.
Where the Steroid Equivalency model comes from
Everything above runs on one stated formula, applied without hidden coefficients: Equivalents: HC 20 = pred 5 = MP 4 = dex 0.75. Source of record: Slater endocrinology equivalence tables. Where a professional version of this calculation differs, it differs in inputs and jurisdiction-specific coefficients, not in the algebra — which is why re-checking your inputs beats hunting for a second calculator.
This page is an estimation aid, not professional advice. The design rule is simple: two people entering identical figures must get identical answers. The design constraint was set by usefulness rather than by comfort: an estimate you can interrogate beats an answer you have to trust.
Next steps after the calculation
Run the pessimistic case before the optimistic one; an opportunity that survives the pessimistic inputs is the only kind worth pursuing.
Whoever you are (investors and founders comparing opportunities on equal terms), the next step is the same: replace the example inputs with your own, note the date, and re-run whenever a figure moves. In Health & Medical, a dated figure is a trend, and an undated one is a rumour.