A virtual clinical trial of psychedelics to treat patients with disorders of consciousness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disorders of consciousness (DoC), including the unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) and the minimally conscious state (MCS), have limited treatment options. Recent research suggests that psychedelic drugs, known for their complexity-enhancing properties, could be promising treatments for DoC. This study uses whole-brain computational models to explore this potential. We created individualised models for DoC patients, optimised with empirical fMRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) data, and simulated the administration of LSD and psilocybin. We used an in-silico perturbation protocol to distinguish between different states of consciousness, including DoC, anaesthesia, and the psychedelic state, and assess the dynamical stability of the brains of DoC patients pre- and post-psychedelic simulation. Our findings indicate that LSD and psilocybin shift DoC patients' brains closer to criticality, with a greater effect in MCS patients. In UWS patients, the treatment response correlates with structural connectivity, while in MCS patients, it aligns with baseline functional connectivity. This virtual clinical trial lays a computational foundation for using psychedelics in DoC treatment and highlights the future role of computational modelling in drug discovery and personalised medicine.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".