MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401344585 · doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2024.107338

Mind over matter: the microbial mindscapes of psychedelics and the gut-brain axis

2024· review· en· W4401344585 on OpenAlexafffund
Giorgia Caspani, Simon Ruffell, WaiFung Tsang, Nigel Netzband, Cyrus Rohani-Shukla, Jonathan R. Swann, Wilfred A. Jefferies

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacological Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre for Blood Research, University of British ColumbiaUrology FoundationWeston Brain Institute
KeywordsPsychologyGut–brain axisNeuroscienceChemistryGut floraBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychedelics have emerged as promising therapeutics for several psychiatric disorders. Hypotheses around their mechanisms have revolved around their partial agonism at the serotonin 2 A receptor, leading to enhanced neuroplasticity and brain connectivity changes that underlie positive mindset shifts. However, these accounts fail to recognise that the gut microbiota, acting via the gut-brain axis, may also have a role in mediating the positive effects of psychedelics on behaviour. In this review, we present existing evidence that the composition of the gut microbiota may be responsive to psychedelic drugs, and in turn, that the effect of psychedelics could be modulated by microbial metabolism. We discuss various alternative mechanistic models and emphasize the importance of incorporating hypotheses that address the contributions of the microbiome in future research. Awareness of the microbial contribution to psychedelic action has the potential to significantly shape clinical practice, for example, by allowing personalised psychedelic therapies based on the heterogeneity of the gut microbiota.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.587
Teacher spread0.263 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacological ResearchSame topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207