d-Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) as a Model of Psychosis: Mechanism of Action and Pharmacology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
d-Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) is known for its hallucinogenic properties and psychotic-like symptoms, especially at high doses. It is indeed used as a pharmacological model of psychosis in preclinical research. The goal of this review was to understand the mechanism of action of psychotic-like effects of LSD. We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and articles’ reference lists for preclinical studies regarding the mechanism of action involved in the psychotic-like effects induced by LSD. LSD’s mechanism of action is pleiotropic, primarily mediated by the serotonergic system in the Dorsal Raphe, binding the 5-HT2A receptor as a partial agonist and 5-HT1A as an agonist. LSD also modulates the Ventral Tegmental Area, at higher doses, by stimulating dopamine D2, Trace Amine Associate receptor 1 (TAAR1) and 5-HT2A. More studies clarifying the mechanism of action of the psychotic-like symptoms or psychosis induced by LSD in humans are needed. LSD’s effects are mediated by a pleiotropic mechanism involving serotonergic, dopaminergic, and glutamatergic neurotransmission. Thus, the LSD-induced psychosis is a useful model to test the therapeutic efficacy of potential novel antipsychotic drugs, particularly drugs with dual serotonergic and dopaminergic (DA) mechanism or acting on TAAR1 receptors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".