MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385009206 · doi:10.1101/2023.07.19.549676

Effects of psychedelics on neurogenesis and brain plasticity: A systematic review

2023· review· en· W4385009206 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rafael Vitor Lima da Cruz, Richardson N. Leão, Thiago C. Moulin

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do NorteCanadian Medical AssociationCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsNeurogenesisTryptaminesNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the mammalian brain, new neurons continue to be generated throughout life in a process known as adult neurogenesis. The role of adult-generated neurons has been broadly studied across laboratories, and mounting evidence suggests a strong link to the HPA axis and concomitant malfunctions in patients diagnosed with mood disorders. Psychedelic compounds, such as phenethylamines, tryptamines, cannabinoids, and a variety of ever-growing chemical categories, have emerged as therapeutic options for neuropsychiatric disorders, while numerous reports link their effects to increased adult neurogenesis. In this systematic review, we examine studies assessing neurogenesis or neurogenesis-associated brain plasticity after psychedelic interventions and aim to provide a comprehensive picture of how this vast category of compounds regulates the generation of new neurons. We conducted a literature search on PubMed and Science Direct databases, considering all articles published until January 31, 2023, and selected articles containing both the terms "neurogenesis" and "psychedelics". We analyzed experimental studies using either in vivo or in vitro models, employing classical or atypical psychedelics at all ontogenetic windows, as well as human studies referring to neurogenesis-associated plasticity. Of a total of 205 articles, 68 met all the necessary conditions for further review. Our findings were divided into five main categories of psychedelics: CB1 agonists, NMDA antagonists, harmala alkaloids, tryptamines, and entactogens. We described the outcomes of neurogenesis assessments and investigated related results on the effects of psychedelics on brain plasticity and behavior within our sample. In summary, this review presents an extensive study into how different psychedelics may affect the birth of new neurons and other brain-related processes. Such knowledge may be valuable for future research on novel therapeutic strategies for neuropsychiatric disorders.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207