MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367664319 · doi:10.47626/2237-6089-2022-0597

Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy as a potential treatment for eating disorders: a narrative review of preliminary evidence

2023· review· en· W4367664319 on OpenAlexafffund
Elena Koning, Elisa Brietzke

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsPsilocybinPsychotherapistDistressEating disordersPsychologyCognitionClinical psychologyPsychiatrySerotonergicHallucinogenMedicineSerotonin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eating disorders (ED) are a group of potentially severe mental disorders characterized by abnormal energy balance, cognitive dysfunction, and emotional distress. Cognitive inflexibility is a major challenge to successful ED treatment and dysregulated serotonergic function has been implicated in this symptomatic dimension. Moreover, there are few effective treatment options and long-term remission of ED symptoms is difficult to achieve. There is emerging evidence for the use of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy (PAP) for a range of mental disorders. Psilocybin is a serotonergic psychedelic that has demonstrated therapeutic benefit in a variety of psychiatric illnesses characterized by rigid thought patterns and treatment resistance. The current paper presents a narrative review of the hypothesis that psilocybin may be an effective adjunctive treatment for individuals with EDs, based on biological plausibility, transdiagnostic evidence, and preliminary results. Limitations of the PAP model and proposed future directions for its application to eating behavior are also discussed. Although the literature to date is not sufficient to propose the incorporation of psilocybin in the treatment of disordered eating behaviors, preliminary evidence supports the need for more rigorous clinical trials as an important avenue for future investigation.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Psychiatry and PsychotherapySame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207