Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers have proposed that MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethampethamine), an illicit psychedelic drug with widespread recreational use, may be a beneficial therapeutic adjunct in PTSD treatment due to its unique mood altering and prosocial effects. A growing body of clinical evidence points to MDMA-assisted psychotherapy as a promising alternative for individuals who have found current PTSD treatments unsuccessful. Within the past decade, several studies integrating MDMA administration with psychotherapy have seen clinical PTSD symptom reductions. Despite this, the therapeutic application of MDMA remains contentious. A range of in vitro experiments as well as studies in drug users and animal models have associated MDMA with adverse health consequences, including psychiatric distress, cognitive decline, and neurotoxicity. However, it remains a challenge to parse out whether these negative side effects are truly applicable in a clinical setting, where a chemically unadulterated and standardized dose is provided during a limited number of sessions. In this literature review, I will summarize the recent clinical trials on MDMA-assisted psychotherapy, point out the limitations of this research, examine potential adverse health effects, and outline important topics for future exploration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".