MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996555671 · doi:10.1101/2019.12.04.19013896

Mapping Psilocybin-Assisted Therapies: A Scoping Review

2019· review· en· W2996555671 on OpenAlexaff
Ron Shore, Paul Ioudovski, Craig Goldie, Sandra McKeown, Éric C. Dumont

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsilocybinTolerabilityAnxietyAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialPsychiatryClinical trialPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyHallucinogenInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We conducted a scoping review on psilocybin-assisted therapy for addiction, depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. Psilocybin is a naturally-occurring tryptophan derivative found in species of mushroom with psycho-active properties. From 2022 records identified by database searching, 40 publications were included in the qualitative synthesis from which we identified 9 clinical trials with a total of 169 participants. Trials used a peak-psychedelic model of therapy, emphasizing inward journey through the use of eyeshades, set musical scores and with medium to high doses of psilocybin. No serious adverse effects were reported; mild adverse effects included transient anxiety, nausea and post-treatment headaches. Overall, the 9 trials all demonstrated safety, tolerability and preliminary efficacy in the treatments of obsessive-compulsive disorder, substance use disorder, treatment-resistant unipolar depression, anxiety or depression in patients with life-threatening cancer and demoralization among long-term AIDS survivors.The literature was found to be early and exploratory, with several limitations: only 5 were randomized controlled trials, small and homogenous patient sample size, difficulties in blinding, and the confounding influence of psychological supports provided. Further research is indicated to establish effectiveness for these and other indications, with a more diverse range of patients, and with differing program and dosing modalities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0170.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.245
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207