MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388498988 · doi:10.1016/j.japhpi.2023.100003

Pharmacists’ perspectives on psilocybin in Canada

2023· article· en· W4388498988 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Sugiarto, Rebecca Leung, Jamie Yuen

Bibliographic record

VenueJAPhA Practice Innovations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsilocybinHallucinogenPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h2>Abstract</h2><h3>Background</h3> Psilocybin is the main psychoactive component of a naturally occurring psychedelic organism commonly referred to as "magic mushrooms." Existing literature demonstrates beneficial neurologic effects in treatment-resistant depression, cancer-associated depression and anxiety, and substance use. The evidence base for psilocybin use is on the rise with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration owing to a resurgence in clinical research. As such, pharmacists need to be adequately equipped to navigate questions from consumers and care providers. There is currently no literature describing pharmacists' perspectives on psilocybin. Evaluating pharmacists' knowledge, experiences, and opinions about psilocybin may yield beneficial and applicable data to develop educational programs and clinical tools and guide psilocybin policy making. <h3>Objective</h3> The objective of this study was to evaluate the interest and opinions of pharmacists on psilocybin as an emerging therapeutic option. <h3>Methods</h3> Licensed pharmacists in Canada were invited to participate in an anonymous, online, 44-item survey aimed at evaluating pharmacists' experiences, knowledge, and attitudes toward psilocybin. Recruitment for the study was done through multiple Canadian pharmacy association newsletters and via LinkedIn. <h3>Results</h3> Results showed that 73% of pharmacists lacked formal education about psilocybin. Forty percent of pharmacists had conversations about psilocybin less than once a month whereas 60% of pharmacists have never received questions about psilocybin. Furthermore, pharmacists are not comfortable with their knowledge with making recommendations (75%), monitoring (57%), or recommending doses of psilocybin (64%) to patients. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Pharmacists are open to embracing a role in psilocybin therapy and dispensing. Creation of clinical practice guidelines and increased accessibility to education materials are necessary to supplement pharmacists' knowledge on psilocybin and improve their confidence when advising patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAPhA Practice InnovationsSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207