MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084539237 · doi:10.1097/adm.0000000000000734

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder After a Psychedelic Experience, a Case Report

2020· article· en· W3084539237 on OpenAlexaff
Dafna Sara Rubin-Kahana, Ahmed N. Hassan, Bernard Le Foll

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Addiction Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic stressPsychiatryAcute Stress DisorderLysergic acid diethylamideMedicineSexual abuseSubstance abusePsychotherapistClinical psychologyPsychologyPoison controlInjury preventionMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last 2 decades, there is a renaissance in the scientific investigation of the therapeutic potential of psychedelic compounds. It is studied for the treatment of many psychiatric disorders, including posttraumatic stress disorder. The treatment is always done in the setting of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. A little is known about the potential effects, outside of the setting of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy, on people diagnosed with a mental disorder or have a significant trauma history. In this case report, we present a young man who developed posttraumatic stress disorder after a psychedelic experience, induced by both Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) and N, N Dimethyltryptamine (DMT). In the psychedelic experience, a repressed memory of childhood sexual abuse was recovered. To our knowledge, this is the first report on posttraumatic stress disorder onset after a psychedelic experience. We believe that this case report is important since the history of trauma is prevalent among individuals with substance use disorder. Medical staff that treat people with either substance use disorder or trauma should be familiar with irregular presentations, such as the one described in this case.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Addiction MedicineSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207