MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391329406 · doi:10.26443/ijwpc.v11i1.390

Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy for cancer patients

2024· article· en· W4391329406 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Houman Farzin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Whole Person Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsilocybinPsychotherapistMedicineCancerPsychologyPsychiatryHallucinogenInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite significant advances in symptom management for patients affected by serious illness, physicians lack effective legal treatments for individuals suffering from demoralization, death anxiety, and existential distress. Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy employs psilocybin-containing mushrooms or synthetic psilocybin grounded in indigenous traditions and within the context of a therapeutic mindset and environment ("set and setting") to achieve altered states of consciousness that promote healing and psychospiritual growth while reducing suffering. Current research evidence suggests that this form of therapy could serve as a safe and effective therapeutic tool for such patients.
 This presentation will describe a case series of patients with advanced cancer who received physician-supervised home-based psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy in Montreal, Canada. Our experience postulates the safety and efficacy of this laborious treatment process. By executing this clinical practice in the public healthcare system of Quebec for the first time, we have made an attempt to provide equitable access to these clinical therapies. Having performed these treatments outside the context of clinical trials, we have been able to tailor the therapeutic frame and treatment approach to a more patient-centric and culturally-informed manner. That being said, given the existing ​societal discrimination and stigma against this form of therapy, including by healthcare professionals, there remain further barriers to overcome in the equitable provision of care, especially to certain segments of the population. ​The authors will discuss these and potential solutions to addressing them.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Whole Person CareSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207