Roadmap for Equitable Access and Responsible Use of Psilocybin-Assisted Psychotherapy in Palliative Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy represents a promising addition to palliative care interventions, potentially improving quality of life by addressing existential distress. Despite its safety and effectiveness, this therapy remains limited in Canada, underscoring the need for improved access to ease suffering from life-threatening illnesses. However, important questions remain regarding how to integrate psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy into existing health care frameworks, navigate regulatory challenges, and ensure equitable access for all patients. These unanswered questions highlight the complexity of expanding access and the need for thoughtful, informed approaches to its implementation. To address this, the P3A team (Psilocybin at End of Life: Audacity, Acceptability, Access) held a forum on March 22, 2024, in Quebec, Canada, to explore actionable steps for the responsible use and equitable access to psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy. A total of 57 participants with knowledge in palliative care, including professional and patient associations, patients, health care professionals, researchers, and policymakers, attended the event, which featured presentations, a panel discussion, and small-group workshops. This report provides 16 recommendations across six previously identified key topics: (1) patient eligibility and equity, (2) regulatory framework and respect for autonomy, (3) logistical and organizational aspects, (4) professional education and training, (5) public awareness and information, and (6) research. The elements and recommendations discussed in this article could offer valuable insights for expanding access to psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy in other jurisdictions, particularly in global contexts where similar barriers to care exist.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".