Exploring the potential of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy for moral injury: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This scoping review addresses the need to comprehensively explore the potential of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy (PAP) to facilitate recovery from moral injury. Moral injury (MI), characterized by profound psychological distress arising from morally challenging experiences, has garnered increased attention as a complex mental health concern with significant functional sequelae, especially in the context of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). There is growing interest in exploring alternative therapeutic approaches, with psychedelics emerging as an exciting potential intervention, as moral injury impacts treatment resistance, suicidality, social isolation, and overall functioning. Ten studies were included from 11,734 publications. Studies utilized psilocybin, MDMA, or LSD. None focused specifically on moral injury. Diagnoses included PTSD, alcohol use disorder, insomnia, human Immunodeficiency virus-related demoralized men, barbiturate dependence, anxiety associated with life-threatening illness, major depression, and PTSD comorbid with generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and borderline personality disorder. Studies reported rapid, increasing, and sustained self-compassion over time, alongside increases in self-forgiveness and self-acceptance, reduction in demoralization, and decreased drinking scores. Though in other diagnostic contexts, PAP has shown efficacy in addressing symptoms commonly associated with moral injury, particularly within the context of PTSD. It holds promise as an intervention for MI and requires further exploration. • MI correlates with poor PTSD outcomes, including treatment resistance, isolation, suicidality, and reduced functioning. • No peer-reviewed studies examine PAP's impact on MI, revealing a key research gap for trauma-related disorders. • Studies using LSD, psilocybin, and MDMA suggest improved MI-related symptoms, such as self-compassion, and reduced shame and guilt. • Further research is essential to understand benefits, mechanisms, and adaptation of PAP for various populations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".