MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394088539 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19703454

Hallucinogen persisting perceptual disorder: a scoping review covering frequency, risk factors, prevention, and treatment

2022· review· en· W4394088539 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus A. Doyle, Susan Ling, Leanna M.W. Lui, Paul Fragnelli, Kayla M. Teopiz, Roger Ho, Joshua D. Di Vincenzo, Joshua D. Rosenblat, Emily S. Gillissie, Danica Nogo, Felicia Ceban, Muhammad Youshay Jawad, Roger S. McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHallucinogenPsychologyPerceptionMedicinePsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hallucinogen persisting perception disorder (HPPD) affects a subset of persons who use hallucinogens and is defined as the repeated experience of hallucinations and other perceptual disturbances as a result of prior intoxications. As select hallucinogens are under development for the treatment of selectmental disorders, there is a need to better characterize this disorder. A scoping review of the literature on HPPD was completed from inception to July 2021. Topics covered in the review herein include treatments for HPPD, prevalence or incidence data on HPPD among different classes of hallucinogens, risk factors for HPPD, and data pertaining to the pathophysiology of HPPD. Hallucinogen persisting perception disorder appears to be an uncommon yet serious event associated with prior hallucinogen exposure. The renewed interest in psychedelics as potential treatment options for select mental disorders, especially agents with hallucinogenic potential, provides the impetus to characterize HPPD in its frequency, risk and protective factors, key characteristics, as well as other clinical and treatment-related factors.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2680.001

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

Study designOther design
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207